Future regulation of FHPs?

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

All

The number of FHPs has risen dramatically over the last couple of years and the HPC has hinted, at the last conference I attended, that regulation might be just around the corner for them. How do FHPs feel about this and what would be the implications for their practice?

The benefit for Pods would be that as the FHPs would be given a Protected Title of their own, they would be less likely to want to call themselves "Chiropodists", but what would be the advantages for the FHPs if any?

I would be interested to hear your views

CM

 

I dont know any FHPs who either want to call themselves chiropodists or intentionally mislead anyone.

I have heard of this through the Alliance of Private Sector Practitioners, as far back as last year, actually...so, it is definately not news...

I think it is a great idea

 

Footsie

I obviously reside on a different planet to you as I could supply you with a list of unregulated practitioners that misleadingly use the title or function implying that they are pods/chiropodists. The HPC receive a constant flow of complaints most of which they follow up with a cease and desist letter.

As far as I know , there is a voluntary register with the Alliance which is not worth the paper it is written on.

What advantage do you see as a FHP if you were to become registered under the HPC?How many of your colleagues would really want to have the increased expenditure that regulation would require?

CM

 

I hope others do not feel that I am not speaking out of turn, but having felt bullied by a certain 2 members here, on almost every thread, with derrogatory remarks and 'blanket' put downs, I feel qualified to say that both yours and CFs 'posts' regarding FHPs, and the input you both have to posts by FHPs, have nothing positive to contribute to the functions and aims of Podiatry Arena. Podiatry Arena is a gem of a website, which seeks to support & educate its members.

I will now answer the questions directed at me (?the "face" of the FHP!).

The Alliance of Private Sector Practitioners is one of a few regulatory bodies which (arguably) supports, monitors and educates Foot Health Practitioners. It requires its registrants to also register on the Volitional Register of FHPs, as apposed to a 'voluntary' register. I will leave you to figure out the difference.The Alliance also requires its registrants to provide evidence (when asked) of their continuing professional development, and currently FHPs must achieve a minimum of 40 CPD 'points' every year. The point system used by such membership bodies could be seen as flawed, like a great many others in allied professions, which relies upon spot checks to 'police' its registrants. Organisations such as the Alliance hold their own workshops, study days and seminars to enable FHPs to learn and acrue the necessary points. I personally have found the points awarded for each seminar disappointingly low, considering the financial outlay for FHPs, and I find the course content not of sufficiently high calibre to find stimulating and useful to me. However,it suits very many FHPs, who doubtless find the courses of benefit to them. In addition to courses held by their regulatory bodies, there are a variety of other ways in which FHPs can learn and acrue points which will satisfy their membership body, not least of all, through this internet 'arena'. CPD points affect a registrant's ability to obtain insurance and membership to their chosen membership body.

The cost for such membership is not an insignificant amount, which when coupled with the insurance costs, the costs of registration to the Volitional Register for FHPs, and the costs of continuing professional development training each year, mean that FHPs end up paying a similar amount to their allied, HPC registered, professionals, so unless there was a significant hike in their costs, and this seems unlikely,this should not give FHPs undue cause for concern. Regarding your question on what is in it for the FHP, it is too early to say in order to answer this fully, but I personally welcome it. The Alliance (and similar bodies) have been seeking a place for its FHPs on the HPC register for some time, and that is why they present their Volitional Register to the HPC annually, in addition to providing them with evidence that its registrants are seeking to maintain their professional development by acrueing CPD points.

I feel that regulation of FHPs by the HPC will not greatly impact on how they are perceived by some pods and chiropodists, and there will continue to be division. However, HPC regulation will provide better protection for both the public and all its registrants, including FHPs. It may also result in a definitive course structure for student FHPs, to benchmark the level of training and regulate the scope of what FHPs can do. This can only be good.

Lets await the proposal in full.

I do not want a further banter aimed at FHP bashing to ensue. Please, lets keep this dialogue informative and courteous

 

Footsie,

Here is the HPC's criteria for aspirant groups :-

http://www.hpc-uk.org/aboutregistration/newprofessions/criteria/

I can see problems achieving No's 5, 6, and 9. You may choose to disagree.

As regards to Misuse of Title by non-HPC registered practitioners holding out to be Chiropodists, as of Dec 2009 there were 810 cases recorded. Which, since the inception of the HPC in 2002 averages out at 115 cases per year.
As the numbers of FHPs practising is not recorded anywhere it is not posssible to express this as a percentage.

I was told by e-mail by the admin dept at one FHP training school that "no-one fails the practical".

These are facts.

How you interpret them is up to you.

I am quite sure we would all agree with that.
I am also sure that there are great many other persons (not necessarily in the footcare industry) who visit the site and will be quite enlightened by what they read.

Perhaps you could define what you mean by "FHP bashing" ? This is a phrase that is often bandied about supporting, IMO, a type of victim mentality.

CF.

 

Just for the record, one person did fail at the time I did my practical

 

I would like to add that I am wondering why, I am the person to whom the FHP issues/gripes etc get levied CF?

 

Footsie,
Because you are the one with the information!

Asking the FHP training schools any questions is non-productive as they do not reply.

Organisations that represent FHPs say that they will not respond to non-members and we need to join their organisation to find out any information.

Local FHPs that I have contacted do not reply.

It's easier to get into the Freemasons !

There is no National register for FHPs or written Scope of Practice etc etc etc.

All of this engenders suspicion and mistrust.

So IMO FHPs only have themselves to blame is they get a bad press.

CF

 

Please refrain from using all of the above as a stick to beat me with

You may be better to leave the detective work to someone with authority to find out?

As for the Freemasons - are you the right sex to join? and would you really want to wear THAT apron?!

 

Footsie,

I'm not sure who that would be ?

You asked why you were getting all the queries about FHPs.

I have given you the facts and explained why.

If you choose to take umbridge that's up to you.

You still haven't explained what you define as "FHP bashing"

CF

 

Dear footsiegirl,
I seriously considered doing an fhp course, I had discussions with people on this site and also talked with a local chiropodist. I personally decided that for me that the courses available, whilst some were superior to others, were far too diverse.
If fhps became regulated then it would be a great opportunity to address all issues of concern:- hours of study AND time of supervised clinical practice. This would lead to the training schools being able to award a NATIONALLY recognised qualification that only the governing body would be able to take off you. If said training courses and qualifications were adjusted this would also allow fhps to work in the nhs and private sector as podiatry assistants, whilst still being able to practice in their own right. I feel that any serious discussion in this context would only be beneficial to all but especially the public. Good practioners in any field know their limitations, know when to refer on and know what they are good at, personally having a piece of paper that confirmed that was important to me, I am not belittling those of you that are fhps, I apologise if it sounds as if I am, but to be taken seriously as a professional surely is not a bad goal.
Sister

 

stop it CF. I will do now what I should have done when I first had nasty posts from you, and "IGNORED" you. Now all we need is for every one else to do the same! :drinks

 

Footsie,
Forgive me, I thought we were having a discussion?

Am I on the wrong forum?

So you think that asking questions to elicit information is "nasty" ?

So you think that challenging another's viewpoint or opinions "nasty"?

And anyone who gives you facts you don't like is "nasty"?

OK.

So stick around here until someone mentions :-

proprioceptive insoles
Marigold Therapy
Dentron biogun
Pinpointe lasers
adapting to walking on a hard flat surface
Root Theory
or that new gismo for treating mycotic nails (can't remember the name of it)

then see how "nasty" it gets.


CF

 

Dear "sister"

Thank you for your considered response. Far from it being belittling, the issues you raise are pertinent. It was Cornmerchant who started the thread on this topic, however, and my comments were merely in response to the 'verbal' bullying that I have witnessed and had directed at me, which is displayed by a minority of members on the Arena, and directed specifically towards FHPs , who after all, are here to learn and be supported - like any other member.

I am all for debate and discussion. I hope you are well.

Regards FG:drinks

 

Cornmerchant,
Sorry- addressed my response to footsie and not to you the origional poster.
Footsie- thanks for the reply
Sister

 

Raaaargh!!! Wassat? Where are they?!

Oh. Sorry. False alarm.

Catfoot actually makes a valid point here. Part of the suspicion between the two groups is based on FHPs (with honourable exceptions )being backward about coming forward.

And this is perhaps the reason why. I think it is fair to say that the attitude of many pods toward FHPs start with patronising and ranges to the downright aggressive.

And so we have a very Palestinian type situation where both sides can point to a history of aggression by the other and rightly level accusations.

A constructive dialogue between the two sides is, In my naive and optimistic opinion, possible. But it will require both sides to take great care not to give offence without meaning to, or take offence where none is meant. I think those two things have already happened plenty on this thread alone.

Its a good and relevant OP. It would be great if those with the information to speak knowledgably could rise above the history and discuss it.

 

:good:

I welcome a healthy debate, but as you said, many pods attitudes vary from patronising to aggressive, and its that element which detracts from such debate.

I (with history) am willing to discuss, but no longer with 2 certain posters, as
there is no mileage in it - I definately do not wish to be brow beaten by them. So, am I with some knowledge...., but it will take others to contribute too.

So, lets have some dialogue from other FHPs - I am beginning to feel somewhat lonely around here ! :boohoo:

 

footsiegirl

I posted in good faith- holding different views from yours does not constitute bullying, grow up.

I am a little tired of you rearing you head on posts all over the place and then playng the victim, while most of the time you are actually adding nothing at all to the discussion.
Block me as you will- I dont give a brass monkey.

As far as I go- end of thread.

 

Footsie

I would welcome a knowledge of the standards of practice, code of conduct and capabilities of a FHP. I would welcome knowledge of the training of a FHP, the scope and limitations of practice.

Your cooperation as an ambassador for the FHP will help to break down barriers that have been erected, not due to ignorance, but due to a simple lack of sharing of information.

Beware of commercial trainers, they will have your last penny for .000001 CPD point! I think you have sussed this already. Why do you need CPD to be a FHP? You could be insured independently.

For your information I am a regulated Podiatrist working in the private sector. You can check out my standards of practice, code of conduct etc on the HPC website. My level of education equates to the Diploma of Podiatric Medicine with lots of CPD activity over the last 27 years. CPD is a recent invention but the activity is not.

GB

 

I've no doubt you would George!

These exist, of course, but they will not be displayed here! You are attempting to take advantage of a newly-qualified and very naive lady who is out of her depth and would have been best advised not to post here. She will never be given a fair hearing on these pages.

As for for the private trainers and their contribution - it might interest you to know that it was I personnally that invented the link between points and CPD. It has been responsible for many learning a great deal following their so-called training. It might also interest you to learn that the SCP were the last to take it up.

Incdently, I am 'out in the field' all the time and I have not come across you in all of my years in the business (greater than your own). How much CPD do you do? I'd like to know!

 

Thank you Johnpod

Despite your concerns, I am not so naive and certainly I am not about to post Alliance codes and scope of practice on here. Lets share information by all means, but I am here to LEARN

 

Johnpod
I thought points meant prizes,or was that The Generation Game? Come on, it's not rocket science to equate hours of cpd to points. However, that is all completely out of date now anyway.
Footsie girl is hardly newly qualified nor naive and I think you will have offended her, thus being added to her blocked list along with me.
Would you be associated with the private training schools by any chance? If so, what a splendid opportunity to enlighten us all.
CM

 

The points system has worked very well - it was not put there for your purposes.

Back to the wallow, CM

 

First of all an apology to Footsiegirl; I am too late to edit the post so please forgive me for my intimacy in referring to you as Footsie. This was a genuine error. I am slightly old fashioned and do prefer a little formality on first aquaintance.

I do not regard you as naive and if you are newly qualified, we all have to start somewhere in the world of life long learning but I think Johnpod has made an attempt to shut you down. Very relieved that you intend to remain active.

I think John's outburst makes the statement that we aren't going to find out. I am not asking for the particulars of the Alliance, just an abridged version of these in relation to a FHP, any FHP. So the barriers remain fully erected. In my opinion this is both sad and unnecessary.

I am assuming that the HPC will also run into the same brick wall as part of being regulated is their control over education and the standards of practice of the registrants. Obviously the private trainer will not relinquish this aspect therefore regulation is a complete non-starter. The HPC has its own Code of Conduct, as do the varying professional bodies. I was only really interested in this in respect of limitations of practice.

Johnpod,

So this was all your doing, how tiresome. It is helpful initially to direct the new to practice but after a while concentrating on point collecting detracts from the quality of CPD and relevance to practice. I don't count, I achieve quality. Like many of my peer group we are beyond revision CPD and look for challenges to ourselves and our practice. I find Judith Brown's CPD stimulating as it engages follow on reading, self directed learning and above all it benefits the service user. I much prefer the HPC's outlook on CPD - much more wholesome.

I am not sure I appreciate the point you are making.

There are many Johns within footcare. There are many Podiatrists called John...how would I identify you?

There are many practitioners in the footcare world I have not come across but maybe the CPD fields you inhabit are not the ones relevant to my needs. I prefer lush pastures with occupants who challenge my perception of podiatric medicine, not the nutritionally deplete, who concentrate on points whilst offering no substance.

GB

 

George, your derisory comments about the CPD with which Johnpod is concerned with are unhelpful in this 'arena'. You neither know the levels to which he studies, and neither is it your need to.

As I have pointed out before in earlier posts, and on other threads, I find, due to my experience and knowledge in nursing, that the CPD offered by private trainers is not of a calibre that benefits me personally. Actually, I would go further than that and say that some of what I have witnessed on this forum, in the way of advice to other pods about treatment options for particular problems with patients, constitutes little more than speculation, rumour, myth and the "suck it and see" approach. Apart from the serious educators on here, no one makes reference to real evidence & qualitative research. I personally, would welcome much more of this.

I feel that the CPD offered by private trainers for FHP CPD learning, although not beneficial to me, is applicable and of an appropriate level for FHPs generally. The points system, although flawed, has been tried by various organisations and does at least attempt to quantify the levels of study achieved. Unfortunately, this is open to exploitation.

Please remember, that, if members of Podiatry Arena are a true reflection of the profession and the public, it be might be more productive to the podiatry profession if its Arena members were to conduct themselves in a more professional manner within in the Arena forums. Lets stop the bitching and back biting.

Morning all :drinks

 

For anyone who is interested I would you refer back to this thread on Pod A posted by one of my admirers, Mark Russell on 17th November 2004.

http://www.podiatry-arena.com/podia...5&highlight=west midlands school of chiropody

Footsie, if you have blocked me then you won't see it, or my next comment.

.

There's absolutely nothing to stop you starting your own thread on any topic you choose and inviting comments from the academics on this forum.

CF

 

Footsiegirl

I really am baffled as to where you see yourself in the footcare industry. You obviously rate yourself way above common or garden FHPs because of your nursing background, and you are now sayng that many pods on this arena are falling short of your knowledge or wisdom. You are even now criticising the private trainers who got you where you are today.

Not only are you offensive, you are deluded- maybe you had a good teacher?- and it may pay you to have a little more respect for those of us who have been in it just a tad longer than you.

As a loose cannon you are probably more dangerous to yourself than others! Now be a good girl and stop dictating.

CM

 

:deadhorse: