Podiatric Surgeons in the UK - newspaper articles

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

Here are 2 articles:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/london/hi/tv_and_radio/newsid_8400000/8400189.stm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...-surgeons-maiming-patients.html#axzz2Jk6opuK2

 

You are a pointless troll. I'm informing admin that you should be banned from the site. Everything I have seen you post is ill informed, inflammatory, inaccurate or a combination of all of these.

Get a life. Goatboy wants to please you.

 

You are a pointless troll. I'm informing admin that you should be banned from the site. Everything I have seen you post is ill informed, inflammatory, inaccurate or a combination of all of these.

Get a life. Goatboy wants to please you.

 

Lovefeet, I have been unfailing courteous to you. We all know about these 'old news' 'articles' and any podiatric surgeon can provide lists of patients whose feet they have to correct following orthopaedic disasters. You are ignorant of the reasons why because you have no experience, but no surgical procedure is right for all patients and there is always the possibility of problems following ANY (emphasis) surgical procedure. The expression 'surgical podiatrist' is one coined by orthopaedic surgeons to describe podiatric surgeons and may, perhaps, give you a clue to where these 'articles' originated.

Since I am wasting my time trying to reason with you, and you are leaving the profession anyway, please leave these pages. I regret that I cannot help you further.

Thank you

W J Liggins

PS Bob's reply was not posted at the time I replied. Craig, I add my voice to Bob's, there is no point in allowing this individual to continue to prattle. Please remove him/her

 

Dear Mr Liggins....I was not the journalist or the publisher of the newspaper articles......I was merely inserting the links on the Podiatry Arena....was I not meant to do this? Is that not good for raising the profile of Podiatry in the UK?

 

Bill

I recount this tale from Syd Kippen about a Jewish gentleman who made the pilgrimage each year to the Wailing Wall. These recent threads perhaps illustrate the parallels with UK Podiatry... ;-)

 

Lovefeet
How does posting such negative and biased articles raise the profile of the profession?

 

Dear Chris,

I am not trying to raise the profile of the Podiatry profession......I am merely showing that there is no difference between Podiatrists and Foot Health Practitioners in their ambitions....

Podiatric surgeons (Podiatrists who did not go to med school) use loopholes in the system to fulfil their ambitions to be surgeons without going to med school.......Foot Health Practitioners use loopholes to fulfil their ambitions without doing a Podiatry degree.....

I fully support the Orthopaedic Surgeons on this one.....Oh and by the way, I also support the Foot Health Practitioners.....

I guess using this argument in a Podiatry essay would lead to a fail....Its not what Podiatrists want to hear is it Chris,,,,

 

As part of your training you should have done some placements in surgery so surely you are aware of the inaccuracies within this article? In fact many podiatric surgeons or whatever title they use work with alongside orthopaedic surgeons with no troubles whatsoever. If you have concerns regarding the surgical aspect of the profession, then why not talk to people who work in these departments to discuss your concerns?

Trying to drag peoples profession through the mud is not the way to make your point.

Most of all I'm just sorry you have become this twisted by a profession you once loved. If you are leaving the profession then that is your decision and I wish you all the best, but please do so with some class and dignity.

all the best

Ben

 

Go away

Goodbye.

W J Liggins

 

Dear Mr Blumley,

And I thank all my lovely NHS colleagues who worked tirelessly with the Dept of Health to ensure that there was crossover between the professions of FHP and Pods.

And I thank The Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists for not putting a note on the front page of their website to state what the difference is between Pods and FHPs. This went along way in supporting the private Podiatrist when they were out finding business. Afterall, its not in the interest of the patients to know the difference......

And I thank The Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists for allowing FHPs to promote themselves on the Accredited Podiatrist section of their website. It is great to know that there were procedures in place to prevent this type of thing from happening. It is good to know that they do not take the Accreditation thing too seriously, if they had, then this type of thing would not have happened.

And I am also very thankful to the HCPC for supporting me with regard to FHPs misusing protected titles and words. I am so pleased to know that if a FHP using protected titles and words, and only had a telephone number on their business card, was able to continue to do so, because the HCPC are unable to deal with these matters if only a telephone number is provided.

And last buy not least.....I must thank The Society of Chiropodists and Podiatrists and also the HCPC for taking my money every year so that I could provide a gold standard service to my patients....and to not get a gold service in return from these organisations......

It was banged into me at uni that the Podiatry profession was under threat by the unregulated FHPs......and now I know why!!!!!!

 

I add my voice to those wanting this individual removed from Pod Arena.

 

Can't say I would support an absolute ban from this site. However, when a member is seen to be submitting obtuse, inaccurate, poor quality and self indulgent posts; they should be monitered and rejected.

If the site is seen as professionally unworthy, the professional will no doubt leave !

 

Dear Admin,
Please delete this whole thread. These links and the issues surrounding them have been posted and discussed previously on podiatry arena. This thread adds nothing to the site or the profession. I would appreciate it if it could be removed.
Thanks,
Bob

 

Yep.

Ho ho ho

 

And speed. Lets not forget speed.

Lovefeet, you've said your piece. Several times. We hear you. Now please take it elsewhere where they might give you some cheese to go with your whine.

 

WOW. I never knew the Podiatry Arena could be so interesting.
I love it

 

Rosherville, you do make me laugh.....Are you upset that I managed to find the code to unlock the brainwashing that was instilled in me at uni.

Its a shame that you do not approve seeing anything that challenges the ideology of UK Podiatry profession. Maybe that is why it has lasted so long operating in this dismal fashion....Not many folk want to voice the "other face" of podiatry in the UK.

 

Lovefeet what is the difference between the aims of podiatrists and orthopaedic surgeons?

 

Podiatrist wants to undertake a Podiatry degree and Orthod wants to undertake a medical degree.:bash:

 

Here are another 2 articles:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/3...-patients-by-calling-themselves-surgeons.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18828208

 

Podiatrists will already have a podiatry degree, and orthopods a medical degree, so why would their aim be to undertake another one?

 

Mr Rawlins, a member of the British Medical Association's Central Consultants Specialist Committee, said: "If they are asked by patients are they doctors then they have to say no.

"And yet they are allowed to call themselves surgeons, which most patients will take as having been to medical school and having undergone the same rigorous medical training as heart surgeons and others.


Above is a quote from the first article Lovefeet listed above. Nice to see the ortho surgeon needs to compare foot surgery with the kudos of heart surgery first and not his own specialist field of orthopaedic surgery Obviously looking to attract the sympathy vote from the readers!!:craig:

 

So why don't they not moan about Dental Surgeons, being called surgeons and not doctors. Could it be that Dental Surgeons aren't better than them/as good as them at Foot Surgery????

 

Misperceptions caused by wooly statements.
'Doctor' is not a protected title, used to imply you are a 'registered medical practitioner' is an offence. The same applies to 'surgeon' if used to imply you are a 'registered medical practitioner'.

Provided you qualify your use of the title 'surgeon' eg: Podiatric Surgeon. It's perfectly legal, always has been !
This fact is never admitted by self interested individuals.

 

Hi Rosherville,
You seem to be clued up on this matter. Provided you qualify your use of the title 'surgeon' eg: Podiatric Surgeon. It's perfectly legal, always has been !
This fact is never admitted by self interested individuals.[/QUOTE]

The thing is - don't mean to give you a hard time on this - but are you able to add a link to your quote, that way we can accept what you are saying - cos we have seen it in a newspaper article, etc.:bash:

 

With the introduction of Independent prescribing (IP) rights for Podiatrists some Universities are looking at offering a bolt on PhD with the course.

This will enable Podiatric Surgeons to HAVE a Doctor title and silence the media and colleagues like LoveFeet who appear to be pessimistic about their chosen profession.

On the other hand what is the problem with Podiatric Surgeons calling themselves Surgical Podiatrists or Consultant Podiatrist?? As long as surgery by podiatrists continues to be evidence based and patient satisfaction proven through PROMs or patient satisfaction surveys etc which is above and beyond that of minimum national guidelines then surgery by podiatrists will always be around and improve as a service.

liam.

 

I can't believe this thread is still going. At least some posts on here have turned it from the original rubbish.

Liam - thanks for the interesting post. Which university is thinking of bolting on a PhD to a prescribing course? As far as I understand it, a PhD is a research degree and has very little in common with IP courses so I would be surprised if the universities did that. At my stage of my career, I do not want to do a research degree as I feel it has little chance of making my patient outcomes any better. I have no burning desire to call myself a doctor either. Why would I? I'm a podiatrist/ podiatric surgeon. I wouldn't call myself a 'surgical podiatrist' as it is poor use of the English language and I'm guilty enough of that already. I am not bothered about either Consultant Podiatrist or Consultant Podiatric Surgeon - the latter is on my job description so that is my title. My preference for it over the former would only be to differentiate my role from another generalist podiatrist who does not have a fellowship in surgery.

Threads about title crop up on here from time to time. Often following newspaper articles that are deliberately inflammatory in order to sell papers. Being called a doctor is not the panacea. Being the best at what you do comes much closer so I'll keep working at that. I call myself a podiatric surgeon and I'm proud to. I strive to do a good job in my area and that is my title.

 

I agree patient quality care comes above any title. Thanks for the your response.

Regarding the PhD + IP rights would have to be an option for those who have gained MSc first and i do believe Podiatric surgeons who obviously have already gained MSc some may infact like the title to silence media and other professions Regarding this debate of doctor or no doctor?

I agree both PhD + IP are two separate entities however I'm sure universities could make this pathway to doctorate title easier and incorporate both aspects.

Let me clarify that this was an informal discussion with a UK university lecturer/doctor and is in the discussion period of whether this could work or not. Food for thought.

Liam.

 

It's highly unlikely that any UK university will offer a PhD in anyway linked to the IP qualification. The former, as Bob rightly points out, is a purely research degree, whereas the latter is a professionally-related, academically-based, vocational qualification.

You cannot simply enrol on a PhD, even if you have completed a Masters degree - it involves coming up with a project that a supervisor would be willing to take on, persuasion of that supervisor that you are a suitable candidate with the right level of drive and perseverance, and significant preparation in the writing of a research proposal. If you can't fulfill these criteria, then no matter how good your masters degree, you are not going to be taken on to do a PhD.

With the IP programme, if you have the right amount of post-reg experience, are HPC registered, and can show a clear clinical need and have support from your employer, then basically you're on the programme (I know this to be the case as I was part of the project group who wrote the programme documents for the IP course). The only academic combination which would be realistic would be with an appropriate MSc, but it would depend what the MSc was in. Personally, I think the IP programme is strong enough to be a stand-alone.

JBB