It has always bugged me and still I have no clarity. Why is podiatry a stand alone discipline and not a post medicine speciality (e.g. dermatology, pathology, surgery etc.)?
Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
Is it because it followed on from our fore-bearers in chiropody?
If so then are we truly the same profession?
Have we not advanced so much that, although we do chiropody work, it accounts for a mere percentage of our scope of practice?
Why has it been a struggle - and a multiple decade struggle at that - for prescription rights, surgery rights, advancing scope of practice recognition etc, for those that have gotten it right - for the most part (US, UK, AUS), and for those that continue the struggle (SA, FRA, Greece, Italy etc.). How and why did the US get it so right?
In truth we should all have as much scope to practice our profession as our US counterparts. We should have access to proper and comprehensive training in all aspects of what we do or how we choose to focus our practices (sub-specialities in podopaed's, sports, general etc.).
Instead we have had to 'fight' for what we now do have or still need in order to offer our patients a comprehensive and competent podiatric physician.
Are we up against the old guard to whom we take up this 'fight' who consider us still glorified chiropodists? How do we change (after all this time) this misconception, on masse!
Would it not be better to position podiatry as a post-medicine speciality then?
Perplexing.
Brandon
Loading...
- Similar Threads - Podiatry post medicine
-
- Replies:
- 0
- Views:
- 1,528
-
- Replies:
- 0
- Views:
- 3,205
-
- Replies:
- 1
- Views:
- 4,807
-
- Replies:
- 0
- Views:
- 5,523
-
- Replies:
- 1
- Views:
- 3,591
-
- Replies:
- 1
- Views:
- 5,927
-
- Replies:
- 3
- Views:
- 4,383