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.

The UK needs a united professional body

Discussion in 'United Kingdom' started by Simon Spooner, Jul 20, 2012.

?

The podiatry profession within the UK would be best represented by:

  1. A single, united professional body

    29 vote(s)
    74.4%
  2. A number of disparate professional body's

    10 vote(s)
    25.6%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

  1. Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    All, the majority of the allied health professions in the UK have a single professional association which represents the interests of their members; providing leadership, promoting the profession and setting professional standards. By contrast podiatry in the UK is, at present, represented by a number of disparate professional body's.

    Do you believe that the profession of podiatry should be better represented by a single, united professional body? Or, is it better represented as it currently is, by the number of existing body's that we have at present in the UK? i.e., society of chiropodists and podiatrsits + institute of chiropodists and podiatrists + a.n.other etc. Vote in the poll, please. Tell your friends, get them to join podiatry arena and vote too.
     
  2. RobinP

    RobinP Well-Known Member

    I can't speak for podiatry but in prosthetics and orthotics we have one body and there is a distinct deliniation between different types of members such that having a breakaway group has been voiced before, I believe. Perhaps more than one body is not such a bad approach?
     
  3. I vote for a number of professional bodies. For the same reason that I like a number of political parties to choose from. I think choice is healthy.
     
  4. So why haven't you expressed that preference in the poll, Robert? :bash:
     
  5. Choice maybe healthy for the individual, but do you think it is helpful and healthy for the profession within the UK and it's standing as a whole? If so, why?

    57 views so far, yet only 4 votes :deadhorse:
     
  6. I did. :rolleyes:

    It depends. If the single body is led well, by well meaning people who genuinely have an interest in representing the best interests of all its members, and in all sectors and is governed by people capable of doing that well then yes, better for everybody. However what floats to the top is not always the cream and If a board were elected which was elitist, unrepresentative or incompetent, then it would be very BAD for the profession. More so if that group held a monopoly.

    Call me a cynic or a grubby little anarchist but I rather not keep all my eggs in one basket.
     
  7. Three People I would really like to hear views from

    Mark Russell
    Bill Liggins
    You, simon.
     
  8. What if the entire board had to stand for re-election every three years?
     
  9. davidh

    davidh Podiatry Arena Veteran

    I voted for one body. Those of us who were around in the early days of the Podiatry Association have an excellent example of how a small, dedicated group of individuals can bring about massive change in a relatively short time.

    According to my late father who qual'd in 1952 the Society were never much use, except to themselves, so that model would need to change:sinking:.

    At the inception of the NHS.......... Society to students at the Glasgow Foot Hospital (John England I believe, but I'm happy to stand corrected): "I have a very important announcement to make, one which may radically change the future of the profession. You will be allowed (wait for it)....... to massage the leg up to the knee!":D.

    The students, comprising mostly of tough ex-services types who had just been through the biggest conflict on the planet were, evidently, less than amused:D.
     
  10. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member

    Thanks Robert. As the current Chair of the Institute, I necessarily speak from a position of bias, so I will speak only for myself as an individual.

    I believe that choice is not only desirable but necessary. Before I joined the Institute I was on record as stating my belief in a General Podiatry Council which would encapsulate (and control) every person delivering foot care beyond that of pedicure. Tiered levels would facilitate those at the 'lower' levels to move upwards with appropriate study/practice. ALL the major bodies were involved in negotiations and, as I understand it, had come to happy agreement, to the level of writing a draft Act to put before Parliament. Unfortunately, at that point, one of the bodies pulled out. For me, that was the opportunity for the single most radical change to the profession which would have bought us at least to the level of the dental profession, with which we have much more in common than any other PAM. Since there will never be a single professional body representing all, that was a huge disappointment. However, since we have all now seen the entirely predictable (and predicted) frailty of the HPC, who knows? At some distant time in the future, individuals may mature and re-visit a similar scenario. I have to say that in my view, it is unlikely.

    All the best

    Bill
     
  11. If you believed in it, why have you given up on the idea?:confused: As I said, a majority view from the registrants should force the issue. The question is, who foot's the bill for all registrants to be balloted?

    I believe that the lack of unity creates weakness.

    Perhaps the mistake was to try to bring the existing parties to unity, rather than simply abolishing the existing and starting from afresh. Ten trenches deep though.

    Lets say we had a ballot of all registrants tomorrow which resulted in a 76% majority in favour of a single professional body, how would the existing professional body's respond? They'd attempt to keep they're own vested interests alive. How is this democratic? How is this representing their members interests? How is this mature?

    If I had the money, I'd poll all registrants tomorrow.

    Out of interest, what were the reasons for the given party leaving the discussions? What attempts were made a) at the time b) since, to draw all party's back to the table?

    Perhaps the maturity required will come from the young, as oppose to the old heads with all their years of accumulated baggage and vested interests.
     
  12. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member


    i) when you have banged your head against a brick wall for long enough, there comes a time when the pain becomes too great for continuance

    ii) there's the rub!

    iii) competition increases strength and I (and others) proposed a concept of unity which would have worked (I think) but was rejected

    iv) I don't know but if 76% of registrants voted for then that could not be ignored. The remainder of your point is assumption

    v) I don't have any money either

    vi) I don't know, I wasn't involved; you'd have to ask them

    vii) well that's for them. Doubtless by that time I will be turning in my grave!
     
  13. Competition increases the strength of whom? The profession as whole? I doubt that. You don't know if it would have worked or not because it wasn't tested, but then you are as welcome to speculate as I am. What's stopping you as chair of one of the party's in question attempting to try again?
     
  14. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member


    Sorry, I have obviously failed to make myself clear.

    Competition gives choices to the registrants. They can choose to join one of a number of organisations, or none at all. Stagnation results where no competition exists. Therefore, competition results in progress, as David Holland mentioned elsewhere.
    Let me clarify what 'I think' means. It means that it is my honestly held belief, but since I cannot prove an assertion I have to qualify by stating that 'I think' such and such might have been the case.
    If you look at my previous posting, you will see that I felt that progress was not being made despite my (and others) efforts. I will now leave it to others to spend their time, energy and money to make that progress - perhaps yourself?

    All the best

    Bill
     
  15. The difference is Bill, I am not currently the chairperson of any one of the party's involved, whereas you are. You are much better placed to bring to change to the status quo, but seem to have little interest in attempting to do that now.
     
  16. DTT

    DTT Well-Known Member

    TRUST AND CONFIDENCE IN THE OUTCOME WAS THE PROBLEM AND ALWAYS WILL BE:pigs:

    I too had a hand in trying to unify this profession, sadly I was unable to take it through to conclusion through no fault of my own.

    I look back and see even now the hatred and inbred abhorrence of those ( like me) that were educated in this profession outside of the NHS route.

    12 of us met for a weekend in Tamworth Staffordshire for a CPD event all from different training backgrounds ( Bill Included) with a view to unite the profession and move forward,to bury the past and move on, and to complete some collective advanced cpd.

    In other avenues, much pressure was applied to bring the parties together to talk make peace and unite or at least speak with one voice.

    That was years ago and still even today the "Tamworth Posse" as it is named by some STILL have a hatred beyond belief foisted upon those that tried to unite the profession:bang:

    Grandparenting occurred to allow " the unwashed" ( me an mine non nhs pods) to be allowed entry into membership of one of the professional bodies.

    That resulted in members of that body leaving in protest and many vows of retribution and a second class member being bestowed as time went on, which still would appear to go on today.


    Si , I'm on my own as I have been for years. I pay my insurance to one but hold allegiance to none. I would love to see unity

    BUT

    It ain't gonna happen in my lifetime at least because the old guard wont let go of their prejudice and self aggrandisement, and by the time they have died or whatever it will be too late ( if its not already) :mad:

    The Tamworth thing formed lasting friendships among its participants, that still holds true even today.:drinks

    An ideal that was a dream for a better future for this profession that............. has not happened:deadhorse:

    Another "round the block" thread IMHO"
    Cheers
    D;)
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2012
  17. Robert mentions choice and cites the current political landscape. Disregarding the fact the latter is in a state of meltdown, I don't think it's a valid comparison insofar as regards our profession, we should be completely unified in our goals and aspirations therefore it must be logical to speak with one voice, clearly and with authority, if the public - and institutions - are to build respect for what we do. And we should not underestimate what we do and what we are capable of doing. The advances in podiatric medicine and surgery are to be applauded over my professional lifetime - thirty years. We should take pride in that achievement. Podiatry continues to advance. It has been a joy to participate in the discussions on forums like these with colleagues like the ones contributing here - and a quick look round other related professional sites suggests that this profession - through communications via JISC Mail and Pod A - is far ahead in building a valuable professional resource that challenges and furthers the knowledge that improves our understanding - and care - of the foot and lower extremity.

    Regrettably, these advances have not been mirrored in the establishment of podiatry in the political - national and medical - and public conscious. Despite what we do - and all of us have made great advocates for our profession in many of our patients - we have singularly failed to make a significant impact in the wider arena. Don't think I want to rehash the reasons why - they are many and complex but I think most who have built a knowledge of the profession's politics over the last 40 years will understand, probably from different angles and experiences - that it is the sometime internecium nature of our relationship with each other - whatever the favours and factions - pod surgery, biomechanics, public, private, trade union, management, registered, unregistered - coupled with a failure to have an agreed strategy for establishing a good foundation for podiatric practice in these islands, that is our greatest underachievement, if not failure. Without that - at best, we make modest progress - excelling on a small scale, but running the risk of losing our identity along the way. As ever we face a choice - a choice that many face on an individual basis - whether to continue as before - or to be brave enough change. The dental profession did a few years ago. The medical profession's identity is inextricably linked to the NHS and it will seek to protect that whatever - Simon's question was the conclusion of such a debate on an example. Podiatry is different and unique - and more aligned to the dental profession than any other. Only with greater potential. When we realise all of that, we can make the choice.

    When we reach that point, then there is really only one answer to the question.
     
  18. Yes, agreed. The test of this would be to poll the profession not only on the professional body issue but on a choice of direction. Although we may understand the issues, we have to accept that the majority of our profession do not - or possibly do not care. Why should they if the existing representation is a failure? So... practically....

    Get half a dozen volunteers to concentrate their minds on developing a professional strategy that seeks to establish podiatry on a firm base - undergraduate and postgraduate. Education and practice. How best to achieve this whilst maintaining our independence and identity. Once they have done so, present it here for discussion then distribute to all the stakeholders (if I can use the term) - current representatitve bodies - all of them - and advise them that you intend to poll the profession and ask them to submit their own strategy statement. Define where you want to go and give the profession a choice. If you want a suggestion to what to call yourselves, try British Podiatric Association.

    Funding the poll really isn't an issue. Nor is funding the outcome. Determining the direction is the only question in town.
     
  19. Every so often - and increasingly more infrequently these days - when I meet up with some colleagues - usually those who infest these discussion forums, the topic of Festive Fules comes up. You will recall, I'm sure, the lucid tale of Bagshot et al. at the fictitious Inner Sanctum, contrived after prolonged exposure to Cornish Cider. Everyone usually submits it was a parody of the Society and the then current chair, RG - and I have to admit to never quite dispelling that rumour. But it was not. It was a parody of ourselves. It is, unfortunately how the public view us - to an extent. More Alan Bennett than Professor Cox.

    But it is strangely comforting, Bill, how close we sail to that parody, can, sometimes, happen to the best of us! It's good for the character no doubt!:empathy:
     
  20. One other thing, and to go for four in a row.... consider this. Here we are - after a fairly concerted and exposed media campaign against one section of our profession - and we still have no communication opposing the view. We have discussed professional bodies before - but rarely, if ever, do we read any contribution from one of the representatives of these bodies - even though they may contribute in other areas. As you suggest - vested interests dictate the future for the benefit of a small minority as opposed to everyone. The way of the world these days. But consider just how many educators use this forum also - those who teach podiatry at undergraduate level. Given that many of the topics relate to developing theories, you would think that the eductators would seek to contribute and understand, if for no other reason than to pass the knowledge on. Isn't that what they are supposed to do? Or has it just become another job. Fcuk knows what I would think if I was a new graduate these days. Sometimes age has its advantages.
     
  21. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member

    Well, that is somewhat presumptuous.

    I have made it clear that I am speaking for myself, and my views do not necessarily represent those of the Institute or anyone else. When I last proposed a General Podiatry Council (along with others) my attempt to change the status quo was ignored. I am sure that since you feel the time is ripe for change, you will be in a position to spend time to achieve that change which, sadly, I do not, since the responsibilities which you mention are extremely time consuming.

    With regret therefore, I will leave this debate.

    Kind regards

    Bill Liggins
     
  22. W J Liggins

    W J Liggins Well-Known Member


    Hello Mark I actually prefer spoof to parody, '2012' for instance; it's sometimes more accurate.

    With my Institute hat firmly on, I can tell you that the Institute did respond to the recent attack - you can read the response on the Institute web site - but as I have remarked elsewhere, unfortunately the media does have a habit of misquoting. However, the Institute will always seek to respond and protect it's members whatever element of the profession they practice and to protect and promote the profession as a whole. Sorry to be mysterious but there will be more about this on the web site and in the public media over the next day or two.

    All the best

    Bill
     
  23. Out of interest, how many podiatric surgeons does the institute represent?
     
  24. The problem is that the stakeholders, probably because they myopically wish to protect their stakes, don't seem too interested, at least if this statement by the Chairman of the Institute of Chiropodists and Podiatrists is anything to go by:

    Whether you think that you are speaking for yourself or the party that you represent, if the chairman isn't interested, Bill.... You've made your opinion perfectly clear. And what are the responsibilities of the chairperson of the Institute of chiropodists and podiatrists? To act in the best interests of the profession? Or, to do that which isn't too time consuming? Perhaps a proportional representation system is the way forward? What proportion of the Registered Chiropodists/ podiatrists does the institute represent?

    I did say that I wanted a new job....
     
  25. Yes, agreed again. Why, because the status quo suits. I was discussing the podiatry profession at the weekend with a friend - a cardiologist - who was remarking on the orthopaedic situation and he asked who our representative body was. Singular. When told - the Society, Institute, Alliance etc etc - he said, simply, "quaint!" Even the names support the Alan Bennett contention - Institute: a run down working men's club of uncertain future. Society: a group of curious people who partake in strange games and rituals. Get real. As far as I can remember we've had an identity crisis and major inferiority complex. Perhaps it comes with working in isolation. That coupled with inertia are traditionally the greatest hurdles.

    I suspect the real reason the current political representation do not wish to discuss strategy is that because they don't have one - at least a viable one of which they are part of.
     
  26. davidh

    davidh Podiatry Arena Veteran

    Absolutely agree Mark - nice blog btw.
     
  27. Oh, no. That's were I draw the line: I'm a huge fan of Phoenix Nights. And now I'll just be imagining Bill in a wheelchair, patting a donation box for the blind every time I respond to him- thanks, fella. Singed into my mind, Mr Russell. Singed into my mind...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pzf0X72dVcU
    "Lets: r, r, r, rave on" at the Institute; "that's fine if you're a single celled organism"... etc.

    I don't know what proportion of the registered podiatrists in the UK it is that the institute actually represent, perhaps it's like the "monster raving looney party" hoping to influence governmental policy? Maybe the thoughts of the registered podiatrists in the UK need to target those that hold the majority of power, as oppose to those party's at the fringe and with little power in the first place? Who is the chair of the Society at the moment?
     
  28. DTT

    DTT Well-Known Member

    Si

    Whilst I'll go along with you a lot of times, this is really takin the piss :rolleyes:

    You like me have no aliegence to any professional al body nor do you contribute as far as I know ?? ( if i'm wrong disreguard this post please)

    SO.....


    If you want a change of career go and join one, both, all, and become the big cheese and sort out this profession ( see how easy it is when your there :dizzy: )

    I'll support you and I think you ( with the rough edges taken off) would be a great ambassador.

    But until your willing to do that.......

    You have no constructive meaningful opinion as you are not( again as far as I know) a member of any of the organisations you are sniping at, so therefore your opinion stops here. Which means jack shyte:rolleyes:

    If you aint willing to put up ...shut up :empathy:

    Or failing that start a Spooner for president campaign and sort the bloody lot out !!!!

    PLEASE:cool:

    Just my thoughts
    Cheers Fella
    D;)
     
  29. I'll disregard it then, as you requested. And yes, for the record, I was taking the piss. Yet, within that there were some important points: what proportion of the registered number of podiatrists within the UK does the institute of chiropodists and podiatrists represent? And from an earlier post, what proportion of podiatric surgeons within the UK does the institute of chiropodists and podiatrists represent?

    Thanks for the sanctimonious comment, Derek. But your opinion of me is really not that important to me. So, with my "rough edges" and all, I'm happy to be me as I am, thank you very much.
     
  30. DTT

    DTT Well-Known Member

    Si

    I'm sorry you found my comments sanctemonious that was not my intention.

    You can huff and puff all you want but like voting...the abstainers( in rules of committee) are counted with the majority so..as I said your opinion and sniping against any professional body is meaningless on here because you are not a member with any voting rights:bang:

    That is a very real problem again imho there is too much importance put on forums and the opinions expressed therin. They very rarely have any real impact on reality except in certain circumstances so.....

    As I ( probably sactimoniously said earlier :D) this is a round the block thread IMHO
    Cheers
    D;)
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2012
  31. For the record, I am. I'm not sure why you think you know so much about me, nor where you are getting this mis-information from, Derek. To the best of my knowledge, I've never met you nor discussed my professional memberships with you.
     
  32. DTT

    DTT Well-Known Member

    I dont think you have made any secret about it in the past....or perhaps I am getting confused with others ?
    In any case if you are a member then you have the opportunity to make a constructive effort from within or .........
    Cheers
    D;)
     
  33. I think you might be confusing me with someone else. I have been a member of the society for many, many years. Whether I agree with their direction and policy is a different matter.
     
  34. DTT

    DTT Well-Known Member

    Then I stand corrected and enlightened ;)
    Cheers
    D;)
     
  35. More often than not, the greatest barrier to change is ourselves. If podiatry was stronger and focused - not to mention more ambitious - then opposition from other groups would not be nearly as relevant as it is presently. It certainly seems that the profession is incapable of driving change for itself - instead it relies on the government and NHS to provide the training and regulatory framework - which is never going to meet our expectation or needs. How many subsidised schools do we have in the UK currently - 14 or 15? What happens if the NHS and government decides that is undesirable and unsustainable (and in my view both are applicable) - what happens to UK Podiatry? Who runs the "independent" schools?

    Sometimes the epitome of professional governance and vision seems like a blind, deaf mute walking down a busy train track.....
     
  36. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    So how are we doing with this poll so far, with rather weighted questions ?

    72% want one united professional body, 28% don`t. Allowing for the fact that over 50% of viewers did not care to vote, it seems that about a third of viewers want one professional body representing 'the profession'. seems about par for the course.

    Now I wonder what the figures would have been had the question offered separate bodies for Podiatry and Podiatric Surgery !
     
  37. For me - the same. One body. What about you?
     
  38. The system registers a view each time you click on the page. For example, if you look at the page 50 times that's 50 views. Some of the people looking at the page won't vote because it has nothing to do with them, i.e. they are not from the UK; some of the people looking at the page won't vote because they don't want to; some of the people looking at the page have already voted. The questions are as unbiased as I could make them, I have a PhD but questionnaire design is not my cup of tea.

    Me, I'd put podiatric surgeons within the same professional body as the rest of the podiatry profession, they are still just podiatrists after all, the same as everyone else. I wouldn't propose a separate professional body for those specialising in biomechanics, nor wound management etc. all of these individuals have usually undergone prolonged post-registration training; so why should podiatric surgery need a separate professional body? I always wondered why surgeons even got their own faculty within the Society to be honest.
     
  39. rosherville

    rosherville Active Member

    For me ? Quite separate organisations.

    It`s my view that if Podiatric Surgery remains subsumed in Podiatry it will not survive the trials and tribulations that undoubtedly lie ahead.

    It will take tough individuals, en bloc, to ensure the profession progress's through to its appropriate place in the world of health provision. Whilst it remains a fraction of the organisation, development will be stunted for a number of reasons. Far better a smaller but united organisation.

    Nine thousand plus Podiatrists won`t take risks on behalf of a few hundred, why should they ?

    Unless there`s separation I would not be surprised if Podiatric Surgery has fizzled out in 10 years. The signs are there !
     
  40. Oi Darwin, over here a minute, this fella needs a chat...
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page