The future of UK podiatry/footcare ?

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

Netizens, please take a look at this:-


http://www.dh.gov.uk/dr_consum_dh/g.../@dh/@en/documents/digitalasset/dh_072927.pdf



I found this very interesting chapter, page 13 about branding and identity. To quote:

"If Social Care Enterprises are providing a service on behalf of the NHS they are required to use the NHS logo in line with NHS identity policy. This enables patients and the public to identify and access NHS services and helps to reassure them that the services are being provided in line with NHS standards and values."

Some Social Enterprise organisations use the NHS logo. So does this mean that they are providing the service on behalf of the NHS? If so have NHS standards dropped to providing services in "drop-in" centres for old folk? If clients have to buy their own nail clippers then who is responsible for decontamination?

Does this herald the end of NHS Podiatry as we know it?

And how does it impact on those in PP?

Dido

 

Dido

The way I understood it, is that "social Care Enterprises" may be able to tender for provision of services under the Transforming Community Services Agenda currently being roled out in some Trusts. I think I'm right in saying that this is one of about 8 models that Trust's Commissioners can choose to go down. I believe it will be those that successfully tender, under that particular model, to provide services that will be required to use the NHS logo etc. I think you are right to have concerns for this particular route of service provision as it could mean NHS Podiatry services are effectively "privatised" in some areas. I just hope this isn't the model that Trusts choose to adopt, but perhaps that naive?

 

Ella

If only NHS podiatry care were 'privatised' and funded properly, then we might see a brighter future for the profession in the UK. But this depends on who can tender for NHS work under the Social Care Enterprise banner and how the Health Authorities reimburse providers. Personally I would like to see all NHS podiatry departments closed and community podiatry care transferred to the private sector using the dental model for provision - but with conditions to ensure clinical standards, autonomy, and payments. Unfortunately, I rather suspect we might see a different platform with volunteers and charitable organisations providing 'social care' under a NHS approved scheme. After all, our esteemed colleagues in the NHS have been using similar pathways for a number of years for their 'discharged' patients. What vision, huh?!

 

Dido (you are a very talented singer!!!, sorry couldn't resist that one)/ Ella/Mark,

The problem with social enterprises coming into the equation, is the decontamination standards being used and qualifications that the staff may have.

If they are not HPC regulated OR a member of a professional body, then LEGALLY, they do not have to adhere to any standards of decontamination/sterilsation whatsoever. What state of affairs is that!

If the NHS were tendering the services out to social enterprises, and something went wrong, then legally, the HPC regulated person who authorised the tender could face a FTP hearing as they were allowing something to happen which could put a patient's health at risk. They could be vacariously liable.

 

I don't doubt the NHS would prefer to have some regulation of health providers - that has been the direction of government policy over the last two decades. But registration with a regulatory body - HPC, GMC, GDC - offers no guarantee of standards. Fitness to Practise hearings are a retrospective action and only comes into play following an alledged breach. I am no solicitor and you may have a point re third party liability, but in my experience, employees and managers of public bodies are rarely brought to task for failing services,especially those that are delivered through seconday provision.

 

Exactly - there are a number of dubious practices to be found in the voluntary sector as it is. Decontamination is one of the biggest expenses of a podiatry dept (bar the staff) and it would be concerning that this is where corners could be cut. What do others think?

 

All

Aside from all the obvious things that coud go wrong regards decontamination etc, if the NHS are pushing these people sideways to an unregulated provider even for the most basic of treatment, why the hell should they pay? It is perfectly feasible for a podiatrist to offer a nail cutting service for not much more than some of the charities or third sector provider charges, and at least the patient would have the satisfaction of being treated by someone who is not only traines and regulated, but accountable. Why is the profession sitting back and letting this happen? I know the SCP are in favour of all this going on- they have said as much. Did they ask their private practitioner members what they felt? Like hell they did.

Cornmerchant

 

And are you still a member?

 

A good point.

When did they say that?

However, let's not forget that the SCP is not the only organisation respresenting the Profession.
I would have thought this issue of 3rd sector providers would be of more importance to those Professional Organisations who are linked to FHP training, as it would reduce the potential market for their graduates?

Dido

PS Glad you like my singing, Disgruntled Pod !

 

Many Social Enterprises are not charities. They are private limited companies loosely disguised as "not for profit" organisations that are allegedly not driven by profit but do ensure that directors and company secretary are on the pay role.

They are favoured by the Government and NHS as they are apparently in touch with local need.

They are the future private sector and are the future employers of NHS generalist podiatrists.

SCP seems keen to see Podiatrists working within Social Enterprises and the other third sector organisations so I guess this would show an acceptance rather than "favouring". After all it is Government policy that the NHS engages with Social Enterprises. They let them use the NHS brand logo to allow the public to identify that they are working to NHS standards and values.

Social Enterprises are an ideal employer for Assistant Practitioners with scalpel skills.

I think the profession has much more to worry about than the lack of decontamination standards.

I wonder why the DoH has targeted the Podiatry Profession as the first to go out to Social Enterprises? Are we seen as such a pushover?

Or was it the declaration that Podiatrists don't cut toe nails that got the ball rolling? Crafty tactics and the profession fell for it.

GB

 

[

HTML:

PHP]I wonder why the DoH has targeted the Podiatry Profession as the first to go out to Social Enterprises? Are we seen as such a pushover?

Or was it the declaration that Podiatrists don't cut toe nails that got the ball rolling? Crafty tactics and the profession fell for it.[/PHP]GB[/QUOTE]

Exactly George, you have hit the nail on head, I personally believe it is the many pods out there who use the therm Podiatry does not cut toe nails, that maybe got the ball rolling. However this is not only happening within general podiatry, in the south east at our trust MSK services went out for tender to social enterprises, and pretty soon I fear wound care services will do the same.
However, as said earlier if the profession was to take the dentistry route would this be better for the profession??

col.

 

cpoc103

This should have happened years ago but it didn't (and I don't think there's much point discussing why it didn't.) :boohoo:

Also, it depends what you mean by The Profession - do you mean pods or anyone who wants to lay their hands on a foot ?

I can't see it happening now. All I can see is an empty stable..........

George, you said

I know of one Social Enterprise provider of footcare who is not adhering to "NHS standards & values". They tell their clients they have to buy their own clippers and are therefore responsible for cross-infection control ! So how is it they get the use of the logo? Could a challenge be mounted here?


Dido

 

Col

I understand the envy of the dental route which still remains Mark's privatisation dream. However, the dream has one fundamental flaw.

Many years ago the dentists achieved functional closure, probably driven by a very strong professional body. In other words by achieving closure they could determine their own future.

Podiatry and Chiropody has only achieved regulation of title via weak and flawed legislation which means anyone can treat feet and they do. Whilst those of us registered with the HPC labour under their ridiculous rules, the NHS can commission unregulated providers to carry out their duties.

Unfortunately not one of the professional bodies has stood up to this lunacy and in fact has worked to help the Government to achieve this ambition and are still doing so.

If ever there was an example of how this country has allowed the lunatics to run the asylum, surely this is one of them?

GB

 

Yes, I think fnctional closure would make it easier to achieve, but it's not essential. What is essential is a strong professional movement with clear aims and focus and determination to see change through. What the Society fails to appreciate is that whatever model of practice is used, it must be viable in terms of costs and efficiencies. It is all very well proposing a service model, but it has to be economically self sufficient. Economies are cyclical; when I published the original paper on reforming UK podiatry care, there was plenty public monies around (I have correspondence from the then Chancellor G.Brown telling me he had increased NHS spending by £7Billion in 2002!) and securing part of that funding for community podiatry services would have been relatively simple - if we had made a strong and robust case for it. However, when economies shrink - like now - public monies are much more difficult to secure and services are slashed.

The profession needs a model of practice that is economically secure in its own right. It may require assistance for establishment (that could be public and/or private investments), and it needs to draw its income from a mix of public funds (for state funded care) and private fees (insurance and self-pay) so that when there is a contraction in the economy, practice can continue unhindered. That means considering the commercial viability of podiatric practice and supporting it from the public purse. Public/private partnership, dual model of care - call it what you will.

It can be done. It should be done. But it needs to be driven by the profession, for the profession - not by mandarins in Whitehall, not by NHS managers or DoH advisors, especially those who occassionally frequent Fellmongers. The Society, in my opinion, has been criminally negligent to its members over the last two decades - with their collective heads stuck so far up their trade union and management backsides - that they haven't a clue what to do about effecting change.

Vested interests, lack of vision, no ambition = the death of UK podiatric practice. :bash:

 

I agree with all. My feeling is that everything in th UK is in freefall. The SCP has a conflicts of interest at its heart that have influenced its dealings with government. The aspirations of some to take an acedemic and theoretic path has led to the downgrading of the importance practical skills. At our core it has led toi a collective lack of self belief and deep insecurity that has been and continuse to be masked in the form of passive aggressiveness. The council of the SCP has not "heard" what was being said to them by the majority of the membership. No doubt they listened but they did not and do not "hear". Theu do too little and too late. Ther needs to be immediate aggressive promotion and branding of our private sector, or the independantly employed (apparently there are those with such a delicate sensibility that that the phrase Private gives them an awful attack of the "collywobbles". Ther has only been a faculty for the private sector for about 10 minutes (George will know what the real time is) which shows how idiotic the whole mindset is. This arm of the SCP need to be funded and let of the leash immediately. And i mean this afternoon, no better stil before i finish typing. The article in the Times yesterday was of the type that should have been commonplace for the last 30 years. There needs to be mor and more. But I feel it is too little too late. It almost feels like a conspiracy by a Marxist wing of the SCP working as a 5th column to destroy the private sector of the SCP because they are morally offended by the concept. Far better in their eyes to see the care go to a lower qualified but enthusiatic volunteer or assistant then a PP member. After all the PP sector migh actually be a competitor to the NHS and the Trade Union arm is there to protect their employment status first and foremost. Their is a vast amount of "pick up " available in the private sector and it could so easily be developed to effectively do what the NHS needs for its cast offs. It is not a difficult leap of logic, unless your mind is already siezed like a rusty gin-trap.

 

Absolutely, Hamish. I do not think it's too late, however. It is the uniquely diverse nature of our profession that makes it such an attractive model for public/private practice. There are some professions which will always be public-funded, but podiatry, especially general practice, easily spans state and privately funded care. I agree totally that it is the mindset of the few at Fellmongers that have held back the profession and allowed inferior organisations to flourish - Age Concern, SMAE, FHP trainers etc etc. These inturn, have devalued the profession and the foot health industry in the public perception - and this damage will take some time to repair. Negligent, incompetent, self-serving 'representatives'.......

 

I forsee a fracure of the profession, which saddens me, and then perhaps it need as representative image/body stating the case for the abilities of the PP ChiroPod in the stronges most vociferous manner.
In fact as a marketable image/name I quite Like ChiroPod, very marketable.

 

Funnily enough I've just seen a patient who proudly told me that she was a volunteer nail cutter. She was completely unaware that what she was doing might be perceived as contentious. Rather she considered what she was doing akin to be a daughter or an aunty or sister to the patients. Her perception was that she was providing care to those who the NHS would not treat and could not afford to visit someone like me. Oh how I laughed.

 

I think it might be much worse than just a fracture, Hamish. In truth the fracture has always been there as long as there was a public and private mix. At some point, the danger was that the two would have opposing interests leading to a conflict in respective goals. That this should be accentuated at a time of unplanned fragmentation of public services is unfortunate in itself, but there is a further danger that the representative body for the majority of foot health professionals may find itself in an unsustainable position in the near future - and if so - there is a real risk of professional collapse in a freefall market which would serve no-one's interests least of all the general public. Simon's example is tragically becoming all too common. The Society has substantial operating costs and has a contracting membership, with many having their own financial problems. It wouldn't take a great fall in membership income to make the Society unviable without drastic cuts. Members will no doubt be asking what they get for their money? Insurance -yes. But leadership? Direction? Value for money?

You want a vision? Here's a stage by stage plan.

Step 1. Create a new membership body and canvas for a donation from each member of £100. There are 10,000 podiatrists in the UK. Canvas and target every one by whatever means possible. Lay out your plan. Aim for a fund of £1 million. Seek donations also from the foot health industry.

Stage 2. When capitalised, commission a business plan by a respected city firm for the establishment of a UK wide practice delivery service managed through a directly controlled division of the membership body. The service delivery could be through branded franchise practices with a full range of podiatric care on offer - general practice, specialist gait and wound care, footcare and hygiene (including, if desired, foot cosmetics), podiatric surgery and prosthetics - providing financial support, bulk purchasing power, marketing and all practice management services for the franchisee - essentially all partners in the practice.

Stage 3. Present business plan to the membership within a set timescale - say 9 months then seek approval for additional funding. This could be from the sources outlined in stage 1, but it could also be from the city. At this stage the profession has already demonstrated a willingness to self fund its future. That in itself is an attraction. There is also, of course, the option of canvassing government funds. But they must come on the profession's own terms. We need to raise an additional £10million. For starters.

Stage 4. Investigate and promote a dedicated foot health insurance scheme for the general public. Footplan perhaps or PodCare? There will be an expansion in insurance based healthcare in the future. We must be part of it. For too long our skills have been devalued in every sense. That has to change. If we have a vision of the future, we must be able to sustain it.

Stage 5. Use the capital investment to set-up two podiatry centres of excellence. These are your primary models. Build you marketing - target both public and private markets and invest in good staff. Using these models, sell the concept of franchised practices to the city to raise additional funding, then seek applications from members for practice development - either completely new build centres or modernisation of existing group practice that meets the business criteria of the professional body.

That way, in time, members will be able to control their own destiny by investing in themselves. If we were ambitious enough, we could also seek to fund and staff our own schools, with the primary focus in educating our students the best way to care and manage the foot and lower extremity - in every aspect - whilst providing a robust environment for these student to flourish after graduation.

Pipe dreams. I'm sure I'll be ridiculed and there's maybe a better way, but that's my that's my twopence worth. Over to you!

 

hope this can be part of this discussion if not I apologise.
What is so wrong with general pactise podiarty run on the same lines as a Doctor or Dentist( as Mark is suggesting)??

a quick check of todays list shows.
2 cut and come again.
1 "social cut" nails only
1 simple insoles
1 simples insoles with extras
1 prescription insoles
1 follow up from P.N.A involving dressing and teaching how to do dressings
1 ulcer dressing
1 referal for pna under hospital care
1 referal to G/P ? Diabetic.
3 V/P for cro.
4 corns etc.
1 diabetic check
(some pts had more than one problem!!)


surly this is what podiarty is about, using all your skills???

I'v certainly had a great satisfying day

 

Pauline

I am so glad you had a satisfying day and of course you are welcome to join the debate.

But what would happen if a not for profit Social Care Enterprise set up 600 yards away from you offering all the services you do. They are able to circumnavigate much of the regulation you are bound by because they are not Podiatrists. They can use clinical facilities at no cost. They are able to be Care Quality Commission regulated. They are partners with the NHS and not only are pump primed by NHS money they can tender for NHS services.

They can undercut you by 50 % and they hope that one day they will be a major employer of ex NHS staff.

Would you still have a satisfying day because if we do not act fast that is the reality for this profession once known as Chiropody now known as Podiatry.

Bone up on the Government/NHS plans for Social Care Enterprises, 3rd Sector Provision and the future of Podiatry in the NHS.

GB

 

you are correct Pauline. In PP there is scope for a wide range of your skills, a point missed by many who do not paddle in the murky waters of PP in a meaninful manner. What is also missed by some who do paddle more meaningfully is that there are some areas that can be niche and once the nice is occupied less people are required to fill that need. So it is that the vast amount of work has to satisfy the greater broader need.
By the way Mark, If you worked that out on the back of beer mats your bar bill must be up a bit this month. It is a good idea and I am sure many have had a similar thought. Even creating a simple marketable brand like the Chiropracters have done with Wellness Clinics is a good place to start from. It creates a form of corporate identity quickly. Look how fast the NHS is moving to allow the use of their logo. And her we are fighting a rearguard action and we still have branding issues and the SCP logo. Which as a market identityu is about as modern and "on it" as pipes and slippers.

 

George it is enough to make one weep.

 

Yes and that is why the profession must act quickly if it has any hope of maintaining a realistic future for podiatric practice in the UK. And we worry about FHPs.....:bang:

 

I'm going to throw this out there in the full knowledge that most, if not every poster on this thread is going to get the voodoo dolls out and start jabbing.

The problem has been well described. We can recriminate about who has allowed this to happen, the SCP, the private trainers, government, whatever. The fact is that there is significant inertia in this direction.

Dido made a good point here

And George another one here.

You can see the problem. Pods, in trying to push ourselves for everything we CAN do have risked dropping the ball in terms of what some would call the basic areas.

The organisations who train FHPs have much to fear from the way things are going as dido says, but they lack the clout or for want of a better word validity to do much about it.

Now love em or hate em you have to admit that the FHP sector has adapted to the closure of title rather well, shapeshifting to FHPdom and continuing with barely a hitch. Perhaps it is the fact that they are profit driven, perhaps it is because they have always had to fight for their position and market share, but even their critics must admit that they have showed considerable tenacity.

If we could but combine the numbers, credentials and the validity of the SCP with the tenacity, acumen and business sense of the private sector what a power bloc that would be. The FHPs, in whatever name or incarnation, have successfully resisted surpression for years. With a little help they could resist this too! And if the thin "social care" end of the wedge is not driven in, it protects the areas closer to the hearts of the podiatry profession as well.

Time will tell. But in my opinion, and it is only my opinion, we hang together, or we will hang separately. This new threat will hit FHPs first and hardest, but the rest of us soon enough. And if it CAN be fought, I think it needs to be fought on the Turf of the FHPs and with their help rather than sitting smugly in out expanded scope illusion of safety until that too is pulled down around us.

Ok. You can all flame me now.

 

Nothing to "flame"; the more things change the more they stay the same.

 

Robert
Nothing surprisng in your post-you still want to give routine work away to FHPs and still leave pods with the juicy stuff.

Which bit dont you get about the majority of us in PP? We WANT to do the routine work along with the more exciting stuff- we do NOT want to give it away to anyone that is unregulated, be that FHPs or social enterprise.

Cornmerchant

 

Robert,
You said

A good point, maybe we have tried to be too clever for our own good?

I think we need to differentiate between the FHP trainers and the trainees.

The Private Trainers are in a different market to the FHPs. They are trainers no more, no less. They are selling an idea, a concept, the dream of self employment as a "medical person". They make more money from those who pay for the course and drop out (no refunds, remember ) than those who see it through. After that they have no interest in their "graduates" other than to sell them more CPD.

The FHPs have to make their own way in the market-place and many fail. In my area they come and go with monotonous regularity.

Robert, those of us who have been in the Private Sector for years have been competing with FHPs since their creation on our turf with very astute business plans and quality service provision.

As FHPs are outside the profession I fail to see how they could be any help or would be interested in the scenario you suggest. They undermine the Profession at every level. Let's face it, if they had been that interested in the Profession they would have take the degree route a long time ago.

The FHP's I know of want to call themselves "Chiropodists" yet want none of the regulation that goes with the Title. No wonder they are so despised by many who take on the yoke of Regulation.

Getting into bed with those who want to devalue the profession is not the amswer.

Dido

 

Mark how do you envisage achieving step one and what budget would you require at this point?

GB

 

Mark,
I would be interested to know what you define as the "Foot Health Industry"?

Does that include our local retired District Nurse who goes about cutting old folks' toenails for a fiver?

Sorry to be cynical but it seems a rather non-specific group to me.

Dido

 

Mark

With every respect for your vision- on a realistic level, we cant even get pods to come to branch meetings that are now free so I am not sure how you would encourage them to part with a £100 !

Cornmerchant

 

Robert

I think what you are trying to say is that without the building blocks the profession of Podiatry cannot survive? That thin end of the wedge you describe supports the profession so perhaps not the best metaphor.

Why do you think Social Enterprises haven't engaged FHP's in their droves choosing to train their own?

GB

 

It was George's good point, not mine!

Its the eternal problem. We can't have it all ways. If we sell ourselves as highly trained specialists capable of minor surgery, high risk wound care and all the other things we do so well people will struggle to see us as the most efficient choice for palliative care. If we sell ourselves as the most expert and safest people to keep people healthy by virtue of our high standards and excellant technical ability people will struggle to see us in the more specialised fields.

If by the thin end supporting the profession you mean the palliative element then I agree. I've always firmly beleived in parity of esteem for the two "sectors" of podiatry.

I think that podiatry has developed a schism between the expanded scope stuff and the everyday stuff. We need both. But people outside the profession struggle to see how we are the same qualification and the same profession. We've done such a good job of promoting the profession that its in danger of backfiring!

 

You're running away with yourself, Robert. Public perception can be changed by virtue of good marketing. The issue is whether podiatrists wishto undertake general practice or wholly specialist work. Many do both. But the direction in the NHS has been to divide the roles citing the need to concentrate on "at risk" care whilst discharging millions of people whom are deemed "low risk." Most private practitioners provide both. And in a group practitioner setting, you can do both easily

The foot health trade suppliers - see your trade exhibitor list on your conference programme.

Set out your stall. Write your outline plan - summary of current position, aims and objectives of body, funding requirements, timescale - present to primary trade suppliers for seed capital - say £10k - set-up information website to expand info in outline plan, print plan and organise distribution throught trade and podiatry contacts throughout UK, regional representatives and all motivated pods, set up bank account and incorporate body then set a deadline date for donations. Agree target for initial funding (with the proviso that if you fail to meet target, you return donations) and keep to it. When you reach target, proceed to commissioning of plan.

The profession has been crying out for proper establishment i all the time I've been in practice - over 25 years. Is there an appetite for change? I would say so - if not to benefit ourselves but for future generations of podiatrists. Is £100 too much? Most will make that sum after treating three patients - is that too much to ask for a comprehensive report on your professional prospects? What's better -being in charge of your own destiny or being subservant to civil servants and government policies that, by past example, have hindered the development of our profession and have created a real threat to our existence by their incompetence?

Off to the grind....:boxing:

 

why cant we all work side by side??

100 yds away is the NHS podiarty clinic.
then my clinic

with lots of FHP and PP pods working dom.

we all seem to make a living yet all seem to attract different people for different reasons, often we "share" the same people.

 

Ms B-S
I am not sure that I understand what you mean by :-

how does professional liability work in this instance of "shared care" ?

Dido

 

Pauline, this is not about them and us. It is about future profession survival. It needs you to look beyond your own front door to understand what is happening nationally, driven by Government Policy.

Ella Hurrell touched upon this in her post she said:

Evidence shows that some Social Care Enterprises have become NHS partners and are preferred providers without the need for tendering.

Mark in his post suggested:

I would have hoped that these posts would have highlighted the fact that the changes affect the whole service delivery and that this thread is not about NHS vs PP vs FHPs?

We are seeing pilot schemes being driven forward locally by NHS Podiatry managers to discharge low risk patients into the hands of Social Enterprises to the exclusion of the private sector. NHS podiatrists have objected.

We are seeing NHS Podiatrists being moved out of Podiatry into Specialist posts within Vascular, Diabetic and MSK depts. Their salaries no longer come from the Podiatry budget. Patients are triaged at 1st point of contact and then moved into the appropriate care pathway or discharged with recommendation to named social care enterprises. Will Podiatrists be needed to triage or will Nurse Practitioners take on this role? It will not be too long before Footcare Assistants, generalist Podiatrists and Podiatry services managers see redundancies. Consider that the NHS needs to make a £20 billion saving over the next 5 years - every little helps.

The discharge of low risk patients and subsequent triaging of all applicants for podiatry enables rapid access into the appropriate care pathway and has become the GP choice of referral. How will this effect the Specialist Podiatrist in Private Practice if short or no NHS waiting lists exist?

With the rapid growth in wealth of the not for profit social care enterprises, with directors and company secretaries fully imbursed, any profit can be ploughed back into community services and they can commence challenging for the provision of cut price podiatry in the private market. The NHS has pump primed Social Enterprises and they are free to tender for NHS services. The Private Practitioner cannot. One of the conditions of tendering for services is that providers have to be Care Quality Commission regulated. Unless you are a Podiatric Surgeon in Private Practice, you cannot apply for CQC inspection. Social enterprises providing health and social care by April 2010 must be registered with the CQC. Private podiatrists are locked out of tendering for services, Social Enterprises are not.

Increasing numbers of redundant NHS Podiatrists will dilute the private market making a viable living increasingly difficult to achieve.

Pauline, I have googled your name and it reveals a nice article about your husband, town of residence and practice situation. Hand on heart would your current podiatry earnings support your lifestyle if you did not have your husband's income?

Now think about the situation your NHS colleagues face and the impact that this government policy will have on the future Podiatrists currently in training.

This is where Dido, Ella, Cornmerchant and Mark are coming from.

This is much more than just your "why can't we work side by side"plea it is a serious threat to the stability of the foot care market inside and outside of the NHS. The question is, what can we do about it and so far the only suggestion has been made by Mark.

I do believe that a challenge for professional membership may come from the trade sector, providing appropriate insurance, CPD, professional practice/standards and forceful commercial skills to face the future. An alternative to the current professional bodies and the death knell for SCP?

GB

 

"After all, our esteemed colleagues in the NHS have been using similar pathways for a number of years for their 'discharged' patients."

"Increasing numbers of redundant NHS Podiatrists will dilute the private market making a viable living increasingly difficult to achieve."

I hope that I have interpreted Mark's comments correctly, but what do you make of this. At a conference last year, whilst ordering some supplies from a supplier, I accidentally saw their customer database for my area. I saw an NHS pod's name and private address listed. Now, I have never seen an advert for this lady, so I bet you your bottom dollar that this lady is saying to her NHS discharge patients, "I'll do you on a DOM privately!" How many NHS pods will do this for discharge patients?

 

Disgruntled Pod
With respect, I am not sure that you have interpreted Marks comments correctly, nor do I think that the small number of private patients that NHS pods may or may not treat, is relevant to this thread. It is the bigger picture , as well described by George in the above post , which is pertinent.

Cornmerchant

 

CM,
I can relate to what Disgruntled is describing and these activities do impact on PP at a local level.

However, you are absolutely right in saying that it is essential to look beyond our own areas that to the bigger picture. Third Sector Providers will have a calamatous effect on the profession as a whole and this is what George has so accurately described

A big problem with Chiropody/Podiatry is that many of us tend to be too insular, and I've been as guilty of that as the next practitioner.

Dido