Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

SCP Survey of Private Practice Members - Services provided to Members

Discussion in 'United Kingdom' started by blinda, Aug 6, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. blinda

    blinda MVP


    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    So, have you completed the survey? I tried to, but for some reason, an error occurred which prevented me from submitting the completed form. However, not one to be thwarted when I have something to say, I copied `n pasted my answers directly to the Director of Employment Relations & Business Services....


    • 1.What part of the UK is your Private Practice located? South South.

    • 2. Which of the following SCP services have you or other colleagues within your Private Practice used or regularly refer to in your day to day Practice? Please tick more than one if needed; Legal advice and assistance, Indemnity Insurance.

    • 3. Now think about the lists of services that you have ticked in Question 2. Please rate how good these services are and did they meet your expectation. Please rate the services that you have ticked in Question 2 using the following numeric formula 1-5 (1=excellent, 2=good, 3=average, 4=poor, 5=very poor). Legal advice and assistance = 5, Indemnity Insurance = 3.

    • 4. Now think about the lists of services that you have ticked in Question 2 and 3. Have you used any service that the Society provides that isn't covered buy question 2 or 3. If so please list that service in the box provided and please rate that service using the following numeric formula 1-5 (1=excellent, 2=good, 3=average, 4=poor, 5=very poor). No, I haven`t used any other services. I am not aware of the existence of any other services for Private Practitioners. However, I would like to point out that the majority of Private Practitioners are self employed, thus do not require representation for themselves to themselves by a `trade union.` Moreover, on the one occasion that I sought advice from the Society regarding a complaint, I was given such advice that, had I followed it, my actions could have lead to me being struck off the HPC register for disclosing patient information to a third party.

    • 5. Please now rate the overall service that SCP provides to Private Practice membership using the following numeric formula 1-5 (1=excellent, 2=good, 3=average, 4=poor, 5=very poor) 5.

    • 6. Please list any services that you would like to see the Society develop (subject to affordability) for our Private Practice members?
    1. Support the private practitioner by encouraging their NHS members to refer patients, who no longer fulfil criteria for NHS treatment, to their colleagues; ie, private practitioners.
    2. Actively support clinical research, both financially and in assistance with obtaining ethical approval and insurance for researchers in private practice.
    3. Offer inexpensive and applicable CPD to private practitioners


    • 7. Please provide us with any general comments about the services that are provided to our Private Practice membership that are not covered above. I feel that the Society does not support private practitioners at all. It stands by silently as their NHS members continue to discharge patients to the care of Age Concern (not their colleagues in PP) or, as my local NHS trust does, to their own “Fee Paying Podiatry Service” offering treatments for as little as £10.00. Private practitioners cannot compete with this and many have ceased practice as a direct result of this. Also, as an active clinical researcher, I have to fund my own research (and cannot obtain insurance for trials because I am not employed by either a university or the NHS) which I choose to do. However, should I wish to present my research at the Societies conference, I have to pay over £200 to attend, whilst my NHS colleagues have their attendance fees paid for. The CPD and conference that the Society offers are expensive and the content is often irrelevant to the private practitioner. This year, I have attended international conferences with renowned speakers and the total cost of these two conferences, including accommodation and food, was still less than the cost of attending the Societies conference in the UK.

    DONE.
     
  2. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    Blinda

    Having read your post I'm intrigued as to why you choose to belong to such an organisation ?

    Your story is not uncommon, many have tried to change the setup but found it impossible. Is it a sensible decision to continue acting as 'fodder' for this form of structure.

    It only continues as it does because you and others, remain as members.
     
  3. blinda

    blinda MVP

    John,

    You are not the first to point out the bleedin' obvious ;)

    My reasons for continuing membership for this year only were twofold;
    1) to raise awareness of their failings to the private practitioner in the hope of improvement and
    2) my continued struggle to obtain insurance for clinical research.

    The Society have indeed failed to come up with the goods on both counts, thus my decision to go alone from this coming year.

    Cheers,
    Bel
     
  4. Ian Linane

    Ian Linane Well-Known Member

    Without wishing to hijack the thread down any particular road I do wonder how people being trained within the NHS today, who may wish to go into PP later, or, who may currently be within the NHS and looking to go private, transfer over from the NHS into PP. It is only from the perspective of wondering how many of their considerable skills that they use within the NHS they can practically use in PP to develop a practice that earns a living for them.

    Do Uni's consider this in part of their training program? Are they beginning to cover business knowledge in their training program?
     
  5. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    John,

    You are not the first to point out the bleedin' obvious

    My reasons for continuing membership for this year only were twofold;
    1) to raise awareness of their failings to the private practitioner in the hope of improvement and
    2) my continued struggle to obtain insurance for clinical research.

    The Society have indeed failed to come up with the goods on both counts, thus my decision to go alone from this coming year.

    Cheers,
    Bel


    Thanks Bel, my curiosity is now satisified, seems you have made a considered and logical decision. Maybe, after leading by example, you will be followed by some like minded colleagues; who knows what it could lead to !

    The one thing I can promise is that you will have a less frustrated existence and your professional life will seem more fullfilled; you will have more control over your direction.

    'It was good for me' !

    Best Wishes

    John Mason
     
  6. I would hope the university course would cover all aspects of professional life - including practice management - but I'm not sure if this is still the case. Maybe one of our lecturers or course tutors can advise, however we are in the curious position of having the taxpayer fund the podiatry degree via the NHS for graduates who will very probably use their skills in the private sector. In this era of screwed-up politics and priorities, someone soon will probably ask, why?
     
  7. Good for you - a reBel with a cause. Very seductive! No word from Alison Wishart or Jo. Brown re SCP strategy as yet.....
     
  8. DAVOhorn

    DAVOhorn Well-Known Member

    Dear All,

    i submitted my survey, and while sympathising with much of Bel's comments and agreeing with much of it i feel that there is no viable altenative port of call for the current storm.

    More and more of us will set up in PP because the NHS does not need so many of us.

    I still do not understand why the SCP does not love PP's , and is still NHS Centric.

    I believe the primary reason is the Trade Union Function of SCP. This will have to change as more pods will be in PP in the future.

    I believe that only CRITICAL CARE and INTERVENTIONIST CARE will remain in NHS.

    The rest SHOULD BE in PP. I have said this for 26 years. The first time was 6 months after joining NHS in Sept 1986. The then manager considered me an idiot as podiatry was loved by pensioners and cheap to provide. I responded by Saying Nurses and Hopsital Consultants were treating Podiatry Patients instead of us. He called me a fool.

    Anyway will the SCP, as a result of this survey, now listen to the PP membership and change its stance to PP membership.:deadhorse:

    Perhaps our Australian Cousins Model of provision of Allied Health Care should be looked at. Working in Sydney for a large practice for 4 years was excellent. Good fee structure high standard of care as a result of the good fee structure. Only failing was the lack of provision of funded care for those that needed more than 5 funded t/t's per annum.

    So where to now for SCP . It has dipped its toes into the water of actually asking PP's what they want from SCP. Will it now endeavour to deliver on this information ?

    regards David:drinks
     
  9. blinda

    blinda MVP

    Soton has been sending students for observational placements to private practitioners for some time now. Oddly enough, I received a letter from their placement co-ordinator today, asking if I would allow students, not only for observation as I have in the past (I have an enthusiastic young lady with me this week) but also for `hands on experience`. It would appear that the university is now prepared to cover insurance for this new area, which is nice.;)

    Nah, rebel without a clue, me ;)
     
  10. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    Once the SCP was accused of being far too PP biased, indeed the high flyers wouldn't consider anything other than PP on graduating.

    Then with reorganisation of the NHS, District Chiropodist posts appeared with good salary scales; there was a shift in direction and this was reflected in the Society hierarchy. Maybe we're going full circle !
     
  11. Catfoot

    Catfoot Well-Known Member

    All,
    Blinda has given a very pertinent response.

    The fact that the SCP has commissioned this survey speaks volumes.

    Will they act on the responses - who knows?

    I left the SCP 2 years ago, as did 4 of my colleagues and we are all doing very nicely, thank you, as independent podiatry practitioners.

    What else can I say ?

    regards

    Catfoot
     
  12. George Brandy

    George Brandy Active Member

    Bel

    Are you absolutely certain of this?

    I cannot dispute that the Society has many faults, some of which have been debated ad nauseam on Podiatry Arena. It also has many plus points and one of those is a Committee of Private Practice who will thank you profusely for the survey comments you have made. It adds fire to their campaign of supporting Private Practitioners, such as yourself, within the Society structure. Although in publishing your survey responses you divulge your ignorance of Society function to a much wider audience.

    The Committee of Private Practice is a small group of your colleagues who have made a massive commitment to work on your behalf. They have already secured a position within the College structure for you and I am sure they will do everything in their capacity to "Actively support clinical research, both financially and in assistance with obtaining ethical approval and insurance for researchers in private practice". I trust you voted at the AGM in support of the formation of the College of Podiatry? I see this as the best chance for you of achieving these desires. Then maybe one day you will be invited to present your research at an SCP conference, all expenses paid.

    You reference the Dean of the Faculty of Podiatric Medicine in many of your dermatology posts. How does he feel about your disillusionment with all SCP? Do you support his efforts within SCP as much as he supports your dermatology success?

    You also request inexpensive and relevant CPD. I gather from this you do not involve yourself with your local branch system as CPD provision is one of the functions of the Branch and Regional Branch. They are funded (in part by you and in part by SCP) to provide inexpensive and relevant CPD. The way to affect and alter local provision is to join in and influence. The Union Learn Fund team (a part of SCP Trade Union) has obtained massive funding over the last 3 years and one of their roles is to support local branches in raising awareness for CPD learning. This they do via Union Learn Reps (ULR). Our ULR (who is a private practitioner) surveys our branch members as a continuous process and from this helps the Branch committee develop an appropriate programme of CPD which meets our members needs both in terms of relevance and cost. If gaps in learning are identified, then the ULR can apply for funding to support a new programme.

    You also ask "SCP to support the private practitioner by encouraging their NHS members to refer patients, who no longer fulfil criteria for NHS treatment, to their colleagues; ie, private practitioners". This is another role of your local branch. Nobody knows its local branch members and its local issues more than the local branch. We have had the same issues as you and our Branch, with the guidance of our Regional Employment Relations Officer (Trade Union), now works with NHS managers to raise awareness of its local private practitioners and the support they can give to discharged NHS patients. Take on a role within your Branch and make a difference; give to the Branch System and it will give back to you.

    I trust you made a formal complaint regarding the inappropriate legal advice you were given?

    GB
     
  13. blinda

    blinda MVP

    Yep.

    No George, publishing my answers to the survey does not demonstrate my ignorance of Society function. That is an incorrect assumption on your part (You forget that we have conversed at both the Institutes and Societies conferences before). My motive for posting was to encourage others to complete the survey, and increase the possibilty for changes to occur. I genuinely hope that my comments will prompt the Committee to take action, but I shan`t hold my breath.

    I am well aware of the descriptive role of the Committee (and the vision of a new College) but have yet to witness any evidence of their effectiveness. Forgive my impatience for the day I may, or may not, be invited to present. It is my desire is to progress as clinical researcher right now. I've heard the party political broadcast before and, quite frankly, I cannot see the College enabling private practitioners to engage in research in which ethical approval is required any time soon, if at all.

    How the Podiatry Programme Leader (his other hat) feels and our professional relationship is irrelevant to this thread. It would be inappropriate for me to comment on his convictions.

    Again, your assumption is incorrect.

    Indeed. Similar communication between the NHS managers has taken place here, with no effect whatsoever. I did give to my local branch and was given back the usual hefty amount of prejudice against grandparented practitioners ...but that also has nothing to do with this thread.

    Of course.

    Bel
     
  14. davidh

    davidh Podiatry Arena Veteran

    Blimey!

    Who knew the SCP was that good?

    I'm joining!
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    not.
     
  15. George Brandy

    George Brandy Active Member

    Bel

    If this references being aquainted with you, for the record I have indeed attended SCP conferences but not the Institutes. I have never had a face to face conversation with you and the only communication has been via Podiatry Arena.

    GB
     
  16. Disgruntled pod

    Disgruntled pod Active Member

    I feel that the society does do a lot of good work for PP, but wrt some of the problems that it has, its hands are tied.

    On a separate note, I had a run in with a member of staff within SCP a few years ago, and their approach to one part of the matter was nothing short of completely unprofessional. I am not prepared to discuss what the matter was about, or the ID of the staff member involved (although I would love to name and shame), but i was disgusted. Other SCP staff members who also assisted me with the matter at the time were excellent/faultless.

    Let's just say that other people have had run ins with this staff member and have been disgusted at this person's attitude!
     
  17. blinda

    blinda MVP

    If you say so, George.
     
  18. davidh

    davidh Podiatry Arena Veteran

    Just out of interest, and bearing in mind I was a member for many years when I was in PP and they did nothing then, what "lot of good" have the SCP ever done for PP?

    It's like that bit in Life of Brian - "what have the Romans done for us?"

    "Werl - roads, and drainage and......".

    Except that i the case of the SCP you will be hard-pushed to come up with anything.
     
  19. I think general podiatry practice simply fell out of fashion. I could see how it was the bedrock for the old society grandees - aside from education, there was little else. Aside from frustration. The NHS was seen as a new direction - general podiatry practice but under the illusionary cloak of respectibity that was state registration. NHS management - district chiropodists and their subsequent incarnations offered a career away from clinical practice - and for many this was much preferable. Even better to be promoted out off podiatry altogether especially if it came with a executive management badge....

    Does it matter? I don't know - other than I think it created a major conflict for the Society - especially with the employment relations issues in the NHS. It's also unfashionable to suggest that some NHS managers have simply used the Society to further their own NHS careers by influencing policy within the faculty and council. But it is always difficult to criticise service failures when it's your own service that is failing. Podiatry assistants, Age Concern, discharge policies, Agenda for Change. Bought and sold for the government's gold, such a parcel of rogues in a profession!

    Full circle? Here's hoping.
     
  20. George Brandy

    George Brandy Active Member

    Bel

    Thank you for your honesty.

    We now realise this is about your issues both with the ethics involved in research and funding your own research/insurance outwith the NHS or a University. It is not about your concerns for the wider membership of SCP.

    Should the College or Society invest in an area, such as ethical approval, which as yet, like all Professional Bodies, it cannot influence? Would it not be far simpler for you to seek employment within the NHS or a University if it is your desire to be a Clinical Researcher given the present stumbling blocks?

    You intimate that neither SCP Research and Development nor the Ethics Committee supported or offered advice regarding your application for ethical approval. What reasons were given?

    I am glad to hear that you are involved with your local Branch. There are many ways you and your colleagues can grow a greater share of the Private market without worrying about the impact of cheap service providers. I trust your Branch has challenged your local NHS discharge policy? Use Branch funds to develop coordinated and effective marketing strategies for all local private practitioners to use.

    Your Branch involvement will have also made you aware of SCP Governance and the 3 other pathways available to you for accessing SCP funds. 1 pathway you can apply for funding support independently, the other 2 routes you will need your Branch's support. But of course, silly George Brandy, you will have explored these areas with your Branch Committee....unsuccessfully one presumes?

    But these are all general issues of SCP, not specific to Private Practice.

    GB
     
  21. Ian Linane

    Ian Linane Well-Known Member

    Hmmmm.

    "We now realise this is about your issues both with the ethics involved in research and funding your own research/insurance outwith the NHS or a University. It is not about your concerns for the wider membership of SCP."

    Sorry George but, firstly, this seems a strong judgment to make. Secondly, that is not the view I took when I read Bel's post. I don't dispute that the ethics/funding thing might be a sore spot, only Bel could do that, but to point this out a singular motivation is unreasonable. Given also that Bel has been more than open with sharing her knowledge to the "wider" Pod community here on arena.

    "Would it not be far simpler for you to seek employment within the NHS or a University if it is your desire to be a Clinical Researcher given the present stumbling blocks?"

    Given the effort involved in establishing private practice that pays its way (which Bel seems to have done), the state of employment opportunities in the NHS and the criteria for employment as a lecturer, say, the above comment seems somewhat naive and out of place when the matter has been one of dealing with issues of the thread that are to do with "private practice".

    Is it not commendable that we have a PP who wants to contribute to the wider professional body by giving up time (I'm assuming it is likely unpaid but stand to be corrected) to "produce evidence" for our evidence base that we might draw upon? Would our wider community not benefit a great deal if the army of PP's could be more "supported" and motivated into taking such challenges as researching for increasing evidence base, without having to be tied into an educational / research position?
     
  22. davidh

    davidh Podiatry Arena Veteran

    That is truly excellent news George. I suggest you make it widely-known to those who are struggling with PP.

    I happen to believe it is true BTW, but I don't believe that SCP intervention will bring it about.

    Give us a few real-life examples of how the SCP has grown a greater share of the Private market for PPs.


    On a separate note, are you seriously suggesting that the BMA cannot and does not influence Ethics Committee decisions?
    Do you still believe in Santa Claus too?

    I would expect, as a bare minimum, the SCP to be able to offer advice about research and ethics committee approval. That my own professional body does not is neither here nor there. The SCP is the biggest UK podiatry professional body and can easily access information from academe, the NHS, and PP if it so wishes.

    For anyone else interested, and to help out the SCP - George, please also feel free to use this information if you ever decide to do any research
    Ethics committee approval is not hard to obtain, provided the research is not invasive, the researcher has a higher degree, and the committee can see that the research may be useful.
    Once you go down the road of trying to do any meaningful research with only one degree under your belt it all becomes difficult.
    If the research is invasive it becomes very difficult unless you are in NHS work, or in education.
    My first degree research project was invasive, but I was full-time NHS and had some strings pulled on my behalf. I still had to argue my case though. Being a long-time member of the Society at the time, and knowing how generally unhelpful they were, I didn't bother contacting them and thus saved myself mucho time and effort.

    Anyhoo, there is a way around this. Register for a higher research degree at a good Uni, not a School of Pod Uni, not matter what loyalties you may feel.
    To do this you need a 2.1 or First in your first degree. You can do a research degree part-time. You will be required to attend some tutorials, but not many, and it really isn't too time-consuming (until you start to write-up!).
    The Uni will guide you through your proposal, and in some cases submit it to the Ethics Committee on your behalf. It's painless, compared to what Bel has described.
    You are responsible for your fees, and incidentals like college fees if you want to belong to a college and your chosen Uni runs a collegiate system.
    If they do it's worth joining because the college can mediate with your Uni department in the case of a big disagreement.

    If you produce a really good piece of work you may be invited to present it at the SCP Annual Conference, evidently - all expenses paid.
    An excellent way of encouraging research in the profession, and for me much more useful than actually being able to give relevant factual advice to a smart cookie (I hope you don't mind being called a cookie Bel) who wants to carry out meaningful research - can you feel my sincerity George?
     
  23. Catfoot

    Catfoot Well-Known Member

    David

    Ignoring the obvious asides, your description on how to get into research is accurate.

    What is surprising is that Bel for some reason does not know this.

    Most of us were under the impression she was on a Masters Programme and by her own admission close to a Podiatry Programme Leader.

    I’m at a loss why she needed to approach the Society.

    Bel, can you tell us what is your research question?

    regards

    Catfoot
     
  24. davidh

    davidh Podiatry Arena Veteran

    Of course it's accurate;).

    What's really suprising is that the SCP seem not to know this research route.
     
  25. blinda

    blinda MVP

    And thank you for your considered, if somewhat deflective, reply.

    With respect, George, this is not just about my issues with research and NRES. As I have stated before: I am prepared to and do fund my own research. However, I do take issue with the fact I have to pay an attendance fee to present this at the Societies conference, whilst at my NHS colleagues do not. I would not consider this to be supportive of the private practitioner. IMO, your suggestion that I seek employment within the NHS (I was employed by the NHS post grad) or Uni enforces my point that the private practitioner is restricted in performing research (as highlighted by David), which I feel is a matter that my professional body should consider and at least offer support in, although as Ian quite rightly pointed out; Given the effort involved in establishing private practice that pays its way (which Bel seems to have done), the state of employment opportunities in the NHS and the criteria for employment as a lecturer, say, the above comment seems somewhat naive and out of place when the matter has been one of dealing with issues of the thread that are to do with "private practice".

    Whilst I appreciate your advice and obviously have my best interests at heart, as with all researchers, I am not prepared to discuss my current work, including the protocol, until it is published.

    You misread my post, George. I am not involved with my local branch, due to numerous reasons, one of which was outlined in my last post (although it is only fair to add that those who demonstrated such bigotry have now left). However, as I said, that is irrelevant to this thread, as is the function of a branch of which I am well aware.


    You`re right. The issues you raised here are not specific to private practice, nor this thread.
     
  26. blinda

    blinda MVP

    Catfoot,

    You addressed David, but if I may be so bold as to reply (I am still in the room BTW). I am unsure how you arrived at the conclusion that;

    1. I am unaware of `how to get into research`.
    2. You can speak on behalf of the `Most of us`, whoever they are.
    3. I am `close to a Podiatry Programme Leader`, whaterver that means.

    Ah, you then asked me "Bel, can you tell us what is your research question?"

    My answer is: No.

    Hope that clarifies.
     
  27. Can I just ask, is George Brandy your real name or is it a pseudonym?
     
  28. blinda

    blinda MVP


    I`ve been called worse ;)
     
  29. George Brandy

    George Brandy Active Member

    All,

    I have never made it a secret that I am a member of the Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists and I think it rather obvious that George Brandy is a psuedonym.

    I have already stated that I will not dispute that the SCP has its faults but it also has its good points. One of its very good points are the Governance Documents...in other words the rule book. Rules are there for a reason and can be changed by its members through the appropriate channels. There are those who wish to abide by these rules, work with the system and there are those who do not. For those that do not agree with SCP Governance, they resign and move on. Most do so quietly. There are also those members who think it their right to change the system whilst not engaging with it.

    I find it wearisome and disagreeable that a cohort, having resigned, remain rooted to the spot with the sole aim of spouting vitriol aimed at anything SCP, particularly using Podiatry Arena to achieve this aim. Our international colleagues must be bewildered by this desire.

    Bel, I have explored with you the issues you raised in your survey responses and your motives - to the derision of some. I don't mind being ridiculed by you or others on Podiatry Arena and I am sure it will continue but the issues you raise belong elsewhere within Society function and the systems are already there to deal with them. They do not appear to be the responsibility of the Private Practice arm of SCP. I would suggest you already know this.

    I therefore further suggest that this thread was started deliberately by posting your survey responses to bring the Society of Chiropodists into disrepute and not, as you state, to encourage others to complete the survey.

    Finally may I remind you that whilst you are a member of SCP there is a code of conduct to abide by. It is your choice to air your disillusionment of all SCP in public but it could cause offence to some.

    GB
     
  30. davidh

    davidh Podiatry Arena Veteran

    George - may I call you George?

    The SCP is by far the biggest podiatry professional body in the UK. It is the sole representative of podiatry within the NHS. It has a responsibility towards the profession, which arguably, the other professional bodies do not.

    It has an unenviable history of trying to suppress advances within chiropody and podiatry, at the same time putting energy into self-serving, but not necessarily in the interests of common members, NHS or PP. Check out the current state of play for NHS and PP Pods. Plenty of NHS jobs out there?
    Plenty of work for PPs?

    It is not a benign or benevolent body, spreading as it does, discord within the ranks of foot health professionals (FHPs - whatever you think of them personally - grandparented, and Podiatrists). Bel gave you one example on this thread, but of course there are many, many more.

    Several posts back I asked you to give us a few real-life examples of how the SCP has grown a greater share of the Private market for PPs. Strangely, and not entirely unexpectedly, you haven't to date, in spite of your earlier trumpeting (of the benefits of belonging to the SCP).

    I think Bel was absolutely right to highlight the PP Survey here. At least it's now out in the public domain for all to see.

    If you feel like posting some real-life examples of how the SCP has grown a greater share of the Private market for PPs:pigs: I'd still be interested to see them:cool:
     
  31. blinda

    blinda MVP

    Considering your role within the Society, George, your allegiance to the Society is understandable. However, I am not in the habit of outing pseudonyms.

    I make no apology for openly disagreeing with aspects of the Society, in particular their obvious failure to support the private practitioner. To overtly state that I should do so quietly, divulges your unrealistic expectations of members to hand over membership fees and ` obey` without question.

    George, I have not ridiculed you personally and I apologise if that is how you read my posts. You have inaccurately accused me of not engaging with and being ignorant of the function of the SCP. This is simply untrue, as is your supposition that I started this thread to bring the SCP into disrepute. I am genuinely pleased that the Society has finally asked for feedback from its private practice members and do encourage all to complete the survey. Whilst I am an eternal optimist, and would like nothing more than to see the SCP take note and act on behalf of all of their members, the fundamental flaws within the SCP as highlighted by Mark, render this a pipe dream, IMO.

    Respectfully,
    Bel
     
  32. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    'George Brandy'

    'I think it rather obvious that George Brandy is a psuedonym. I find it wearisome and disagreeable that a cohort, having resigned, remain rooted to the spot with the sole aim of spouting vitriol aimed at anything SCP. Finally may I remind you that whilst you are a member of SCP there is a code of conduct to abide by'.

    I think there comes a point when to be taken seriously requires confirmation that you have the courage of your convictions. I think 'George' you have reached that point and that removing your your anonymity would be a positive move.

    Regards

    John Mason
     
  33. The flaws - if that is the correct word - lie with the individuals responsible for strategy and policy. The SCP is actually the membership. The same problems would still challenge a new body or any of the others if they took over the majority representation. Institutions find it difficult to reform or change just as in the same we as we find changing direction difficult too. Ask any smoker! Changing behavioural patterns is extremely difficult. To effect change in this profession you need a handful of focused individuals with specific skills - especially communication!

    If the profession was so inclined we could have a very different outlook. The really interesting question is why it isn't......We've got the leadership we deserve - no more, no less.
     
  34. George Brandy

    George Brandy Active Member

    Bel

    It is entirely up to you if you out George Brandy or not. Anyone who sends me a personal email via Podiatry Arena is responded to with my real identity. Any one of these communicators could have "outed" me during the last 7 years. They haven't...why ever not? I am certain Mark Russell will have advised you who I am and once my name is blazed in all its glory, then it will be closely followed by a resounding echo of who the hell is that!

    Despite your previous dismissal, we have never met.

    I have no role within our professional body other than to uphold manners, decency and respect to those who work under the umbrella title of the Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists. I work hard for our local branch and region as this is where I believe the power house of SCP could be and should be....none of these fanciful plans are needed for yet another professional body. Read and understand SCP Governance before you follow your heart. For a promising researcher in private practice, you may be throwing away a chance to shine.

    As far as attempting to bring the professional body into disrepute, I stand by my statement outed or not. Always be mindful if you choose to kick your Professional Body on a public international forum you also aim that kick at the staff who continuously work hard on our behalf. Its funny, I never have a problem receiving appropriate advice, information and timely responses from SCP staff but if I don't get my own way, I move away quietly. Perhaps my moral and ethical behaviour has been appreciated...oooo how big headed is that!

    As an aside this survey is one of several Private Practice surveys, so no "finally's" needed. Perhaps this is the first one you have noticed?

    GB or is it?
     
  35. bob

    bob Active Member

    Being a fan of 1980's British wrestling and being an anonymous pseudonymed character on podiatry arena, I can only ask that you do not 'out' George Brandy (podiatry arena's very own Kendo Nagasaki) for fear that you could stifle some of the cloaked honesty that might arise from an anonymous, or semi-anonymous podiatry arena poster. Personally, I enjoy the freedom to write what I perceive to be the truth about my profession from the relatively safe cloak of an anonymous pseudonym username with less fear of upsetting my colleagues and my standing in my small corner of my profession.

    One of the strengths of anonymous internet posting is the ability to provide a truly honest opinion without fear that your career may be negatively impacted upon by some of the other elements of your peers. I also understand that the same anonymity has it's limits and my 'virtual' credibility probably suffers as a result. How I aspire to be virtually credible! As much as I dislike the acronym, that actually made me laugh out loud (LOL)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kendo_Nagasaki
     
  36. blinda

    blinda MVP

    For the record, George. Neither Mark nor anyone has revealed your identity to me. Other than that, I have nothing to add.

    Have a good weekend, George.
     
  37. blinda

    blinda MVP

    Bob, ( I dont know why, but I always think of Black Adder when I write 'Bob')

    I agree and have no intention of outing anyone.
     
  38. R.E.G

    R.E.G Active Member

    given this level of mutual respect perhaps we could transfer it to the other thread about anonymous postings and calm that down?

    George is a paragon of virtue on this site and as such WE should respect his pseudonym.

    Bob G
     
  39. bob

    bob Active Member

    I am nowhere near as beautiful/ handsome as Bob from Blackadder! :D
     
  40. Catfoot

    Catfoot Well-Known Member

    REG,
    Unfortunately, no-one can act on your suggestion as the thread you refer to has been closed.

    Make of that what you will

    regards

    Catfoot - AKA Heather/Mary Poppins/Jessica Rabbit/ etc etc
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page