Read the wikipedia page for Foot Health Practitioners last week, has anyone read it recently? I thought it a bit misleading, but maybe its just me. There was nothing mentioned about Regulation on it.
Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
Afterall, is it not fact that Foot Health Practitioners are not regulated, that is what the major difference them (FHPs) between Podiatrists/ Chiropodists - not to also mention that they do a long distance course - usually about 1 year long through a private institute. Would it not be in the publics interest to know what the diffeence is between Podiatrist/ Chiropodist and Foot Health Practitioner. Also, do Foot Health Practitioners have to undertake training to be FHPs?
Is it not safer for the public to use a regulated person than a non-regulated person, due to accountability.
I thought the wiki page regarding Foot Health Practitioners was somewhat biaised. Afterall, Podiatrists/ Chriropodists work in the NHS and many of them work in private practice, so why then does the wiki page make out that only Foot Health Practitioners work in private practice. If I am not mistaken NHS does not train Foot Health Practitioners, but they do train Podiatry Assistants.
Is this information correct, or have I been given the wrong information?
All replies will be most welcome.:D (its friday :D )
Tags:
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.
Page 1 of 2
-
-
Here is a sentence copied and pasted from the wiki page (I copied it last week).
"...Many privately trained chiropodists have rejected registration and the now-reserved title Chiropodist/Podiatrist in order to continue in autonomous independent private practice, and have adopted the title 'Foot Health Practitioner'."
Question - did some privately trained Chiropodists really have to reject HCPC registration in order to continue practising Podiatry/ Chiropody in the private sector?
As far as I am aware both Chiropodists and Podiatrists work in the NHS and many of them in the private sector - so why would they have to reject HCPC registration in order to continue to work in the private sector - it does not make sense???
Is it just me been stupid :bang: -
Hello lovefeet,
If you look at the page of edits for this Wikipedia entry you will see what corrections have been made by others.
You are also free to edit it yourself if you feel it is incorrect in any way ;)
regards
Catfoot
PS the answer to your question is "No" - the paragraph is poorly worded. By rejecting registration they avoided Regulation but were then not able to use the protected Titles "Chiropodist and "Podiatrist". -
Foot health practitioner
Redirect to:
-
Thank you Admin.
There you are Lovefeet, just for you ;)
If you click on "talk" in the top left-hand corner you can see previous edits and edit it yourself if you wish,
regards
Catfort -
Lovefeet
It doesn't say that they had to reject registration, just that they did. The motive is not expanded on but I think it implies that they chose to reject registration because of the unnecessarily costly and restrictive and potentially unreasonably punitive nature of HCPC regulation. Something that I would do in trice if I wasn't going to loose the podiatrist title. Do you think that being registered with the HCPC causes you to be a better clinician with higher standards than not being registered?
Regards Dave Smith-
Like x 1 - List
-
-
DS
You said
regards
Catfoot -
The HCPC is approximately £80 per year. What is the annual cost of The Alliance of Private Sector Practitioners - does it exceed £80 per year? Also, HCPC registered people do not have to register with any professional bodies if they don't want to. So an HCPC Podiatrist, ONLY has to spend approximately £80 per year for HCPC registration and go directly to a insurance broker to purchase the insurance.
I certainly endorse anyone who registered on the HCPC. YOu certainly know you in good hans.
In my opinion to protect the public, you most certainly do want HCPC registration. It makes the public feel secure that they are in the best possible hands with regard to treatment and conduct, etc. -
-
I've known hpc reg podiatrists who were downright dangerous. And, come to that, unregistered and deregistered ones of great expertise and integrity.
As I've said before, how many legs does a dog have if you call a tail a leg? People are what they are, not what they call themselves, not their titles and not they're qualifications.
The principle of the hcpc is sound. But let's not pretend it's more than it is. -
Robert,
You said
Just curious
Catfoot -
1. I'm not the arbiter of safe practice. Who am I to say what level of expertise is the minimum?
2. To report someone to the hpc requires submissable evidence. Most things which generate that are, IMO, not the main risks. Ironically, those things which do generate evidence and form much of the bulk of complaints are often, IMO of secondary importance from a FTP point of view. For eg, if you were utterly incompetent at nail surgery, causing pts unnecessary pain and with a 50% regrowth rate, it's almost impossible to prove it. If however you are the an absolute Jedi master with surgery but you get caught driving drunk, you can be. Who would you rather have treat your IGTN?
3. I think if someone is lacking in a certain area, offering to help them is a more mature response than reporting them to the HPC. Podiatrist seem to have a strange culture in which we seem attempt to increase our own status / expertise by denigrating others. I don't like that. An offer of help is, IMO, a more mature and professional response than the threat of discipline.
4. I've been involved in several HPC complaints in an advisory / expert witness capacity. Some of this were overtly malicious, but still require a lot of work to answer. I see little benefit in putting people through that if there is a better way of doing it.
There are other reasons, but they will do.
There are others, but they'll do.-
Like x 1 - List
-
-
-
"I recall (but can't find) a discussion we had here many yrs ago about this. I recall commenting on the peer support systems that many other professions seem to have in place for those that are "impaired" (ie a drug or alcohol problem). Podiatry seemed to have a culture to want to destroy these people, but other professions had help procedures and systems in place to support and help them .... don't figure."
In my own life I am grateful for the approach that nudges people on rather than cuts them off. I'd like to think it has worked for me but that is my own view. Starting as a non-NHS trained pod I was conscious of my lacking in areas. People fell essentially into two camps, those who would denigrate me and those who would point out the lack then come alongside and nudge me on. Yes, there may well come a point when, after sufficient nudging and no change, a person needs to be dealt with but nudging on into a further learning curve always seems better to me.
Clearly I'm still on that great learning curve. -
The HCPC registration does not just stop at a CRB check. The HCPC hearings I have read, they definately encourage support and assistance for those in the NHS to acquire additional support, update training, etc.
Unfortunately Podiatrists in private practice do not have that option, unless they do it at their own expense, i.e. going to a university where they train Podiatrists, and just having the NHS clinical podiatrists assist with refreshing the training. With regard to emotional support, I guess that could be provided by a private counsellor......
At least HCPC Podiatrists think twice about doing things untoward in case they do have their names removed from the HCPC register. Which of course would mean they would have to be referred to as Foot Health Practitioners.
As mentioned by previous "postees", it is not just practitioners that may practice dangerously, but it is also the conduct of the HCPC that is important. I certainly would not want to send my mother to have her feet done by a person who would have cart blanche to tell filthy jokes, make lewd comments, and use swear words...not to mention selling on private personal informtion.....without having any comeback on them.
I would only send my mother to a person who was HCPC trained, so that heaven-forbid if this type of behaviour occurred, a complaint could be made and accoutnability enforced.
I am so very pleased that Podiatrists/ Chiropodists are HCPC registered. -
Sorry Robert, but I can't agree with all of your post.
You have made the statement
So I don't believe that you can plead ignorance here, in fact you have just shot yourself in the foot IMO, pardon pun.
You then say
Then you say,
However, in the past have made suggestions to other practitioners who I have found to be lacking in certain areas. The response has been a stroppy letter from their professional organisation accusing me of either "harassing" or " slandering" their Members.
I have never offered help again and will not do so. However, the minute I have concrete evidence of poor practice concerning any of these practitioners I will report them in a heartbeat. I will also show that they have been made aware of certain shortcomings and refused help.
If you have any better suggestions for helping practitioners "raise their game" I would be pleased to hear it. IMO sometimes people need a "short, sharp, shock".
regards
Catfoot -
My understanding is that because Foot Health Practitioners title is not protected by law, they are therefore not regulated, therefore there is no law to say that you have to undertake a Foot Health Practitioner course before you can treat people's feet.
I believe that where there is money to be made - exploitation will exist.
I do not think the point of training foot health practitioners is about safe practice, I think it is about making a quick buck. Its businessman who are benefitting from this so called training and stuff associated with it.
Personally, I feel there is more than enough private Podiatrists/ Chiropodists in the UK to deal with patients in the private sector, who are proud of their HCPC registration. -
In my experience, what many of the FHPs lack in clinical knowledge they make up for in compassion and empathy whilst the inverse applies to many registered podiatrists - especially in the NHS. -
I'll just point out something you missed. That FHPs are regulated by their respective professional bodies. They have personal indemnity insurance in place (I hope!). All practitioners, Pods and FHPs, are subject to UK law in that if they cause damage to a paying client (clinical negligence) they can be sued. If a client falls or otherwise injures themselves on a Pod or FHP's premises, or as a result of the actions of a Pod or FHP (personal injury, also known as trip-n-slip by a portion of the legal profession) they can be sued. -
On the bright side, thats 1 1/2 bits we agree on and 1.5 we don't! Thats a glass half full:drinks -
Mark, I cannot comment on your last sentence because I have not had any experience with Foot Health Practitioners. I only know about HCPC registered Podiatrists.
Training to be a Podiatrist is not easy. This used to be the case (whether it still is I cannot say) but the entire BSc Podiatry degree is based on a 1 day clincial exam. If you fail it and decide to gradute from university, you will be entitled to a basic BSc degree (not a Podiatry degree). So you can practice as Foot Health Practitioner, but not as a Podiatrist. You can repeat the exam, but you would have to find the fincial means to support yourself for those additonal months of livings costs. If you fail it again, you have to repeat the clincial module for an additional year (which of course is part-time) and not funded by the NHS (living costs). So any Podiatry student who finds themselves in that unfortunate situation, is not a very happy bunny......
So as you can see, this level of studying cannnot compete against ANY foot health practitioner course (to date). Courses that operated by businessmen.
So yes I can understand why HCPC Podiatrists are vocal and promote their HCPC registration. -
Ok, so David, are you saying that the title Foot Health Practitioner is protected by law and therefore only those who have completed a Foot Health Practitioner course is entitled to call themselves a Foot Health Practitioner?
I think you will find that there are a number of insurance companies who do insure folk without foot health Practitioner certificates. I know of two off the top of my head....having rearched this business earlier. -
-
-
My point is that both Pods and FHPs can be sued in UK law. Anyone can procure some insurance cover, which in itself is no measure of anything - unless you have a claim against you.
In the real world how many people in the UK do you honestly think go to the bother of buying equipment to treat feet with no training?
Signing off now. Sunday lunchtime - sacrosanct;). -
Mark, I have had dealings with two Podiatry Assistants, and the were very nice and helpful, I guess you could say they are Foot Health Practitoners......
Mark, now you have given me another idea for a research project - comparisons between universities regarding the assessment of their clincal training module......
...and yes some more so than others.......
Yes, of course Mark, some more so than others .....In the same way, that those few Podiatrists who are are on HCPC register, screaming to get the Podiatry profession deregistered from the HCPC. -
Very good. I'm sure the Faculty of Education will be delighted with your efforts.
-
I noticed that there is one foot health practitioner professional body that is operated by two offical Directors (they registered with Companeis House), one of them is a Director of a Foot Health Practitoner School. They also have an elected President (who does not get registered with Companies House), this person is also a Director of a Foot Health Practitioner School......Um am I missing something with regard to money to be made.... -
Look at the UK Podiatry profession. Do you really believe that all the problems with it are solely due to unregulated practitioners??
I've had a glass of wine now (it's all they allow me here), and feel much more mellow:dizzy:. -
David, I do not mean to be difficult but I thought you said in a previous post that Foot Health Practitioners belong to regulatory bodies. So are Foot Health Practitioners regulated or not, because your above post states........"solely due to unregulated practitoners."
If you mean unregulated by the HCPC, then I cannot answer that. Because I have no idea where to find that information from insurance companies. (Foot Health Practitoners been sued).
If we are talking about HCPC Podiatry, then one problem is the NHS discharging folk who cannot manage their toenails. I think that is mean. The other problem are Foot Health Practitoners. It is quite scary that anyone can go out there and treat feet without any knowledge or experience. It is also quite worrying that it is businessmen trying to cash in by training foot health practitioners. To be honest with you, it is just not an even playing field - Podiatrist verse Foot Health Practitioner. What about the public???
It would be very interesting to know what Australians, New Zealanders, South Africans and Americans think of this idea of Foot Health Practitoner (as in the UK Foot Health Practitioner) -
-
Lovefeet,
You said,
In USA the training for Pods is at a much higher level, but again FHPs do not exist.
regards
Catfoot -
Regards Dave -
Sorry Dave but I can't answer your question.
I have always been registered (ie Regulated under Statute) originally via State Registration, then with the HPC, now with the HCPC, so obviously I can't comment on what it was like not to be registered.
regards
Catfoot -
Can you imagine a world without hypothetical situations?
Sorry.
I'll leave you boys to it. -
Thank you for your reply Catfoot.
I thought that maybe the case. It is probably just a matter of time before businessmen in other countries (except USA) decide to "exploit" the so-called "private sector." On the other hand, maybe that won't be the case, because their registration would be the "gold standard."
I just feel sorry for all the Podiatry new-graduates entering the workforce. With limited NHS jobs, starting up in private practice as an alternative - competing against Foot Health Practitioners who are not nearly as well trained as Podiatrists AND Foot Health Practitoners are NOT not statutory regulated....the future looks very grim for the new Podiatrists. Shame and many will have student loans to have to pay off......
I feel very sorry for these new graduates!!!!! -
Let me make it easier for you; you were trained in a certain way by your university, clearly, by example of your choice of career, your vocation is to be a caring person and one would imagine that you would determine to keep up the high standards you were taught and encouraged to keep up during that training.
Therefore, did and does being State or HCPC registered add anything to your training? Does it make you more ethical? Does it stop you cutting corners? Did and do you feel that your professional body does not expect and hold you to at least the same standards of practice.
If your answer is no to these questions, why would you suppose that some others would require the rod of the HCPC to maintain their standards of practice?
Regards Dave Smith -
David, I know your question is directed by Catfoot, but if you do not mind I would like to give you my 2 pence worth.....
Statutory Regulation is absolutely imperative for any profession to maintain its standards. The NMC is the Statutory Regulatory body for Staff Nurses and the GMC is the regulatory body for medical doctors.
If you were to do away with statutory regulation for these professions - what do you think woud happen to the medical care in the UK?
So, in order to maintain the Podiatry standards in this country, statory regulation is imperative. It is the gold standard and absolutely essential to maintain the high standards of the Podiatry profession.
David, do you by any chance know if there are any private x-ray/ MRI experienced people out there who are not HCPC registered (Radiographer is regulated by HCPC), and underaking X-rays and MRI scans and interpreting the findings. They would be working in the private sector....because they would not be allowed to work in the NHS. They would be working independently, not under the supervision of an HCPC Radiographer. -
I am no longer registered with the HPC having deregistered three years ago. I still practise under the title podiatrist. Are you suggesting the standard of care I provide to my patients has fallen since I deregistered? Is the care I provide now unsafe? Please think very carefully before replying.
Sincerely
Mark Russell
Podiatrist -
I pretty much agree with the sentiment of the first part of your post. A set standard of practice to guide the professional is helpful both in terms of the practitioner and the customer. I don't think that HCPC is gold standard since I would argue that I have trained far and above the requirements of HCPC however that is sometimes hard to gauge because their standards are often extremely vague and ambiguous to say the least.
Dave Smith
Page 1 of 2
Loading...
- Similar Threads - Foot Health Practitioners
-
- Replies:
- 63
- Views:
- 24,296
-
- Replies:
- 1
- Views:
- 4,875
-
- Replies:
- 2
- Views:
- 18,838
-
- Replies:
- 26
- Views:
- 10,404
-
- Replies:
- 32
- Views:
- 25,935
-
- Replies:
- 37
- Views:
- 70,377
-
- Replies:
- 1
- Views:
- 1,220
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.