Update on continuing competency requirements for occupational therapists in New York State

Over two years ago I wrote this article about continuing competency regulations for occupational therapists in New York State. Based on a review of the status of proposed regulations for continuing comptency as reported by the New York State Assembly website - there has been no action on this bill and it seems to be 'stuck' in the Higher Education Committee.

The idea behind this proposed legislation would be to improve consumer protection by mandating that occupational therapy practitioners in New York State participate in some mandatory continuing education. As of right now, the therapist who is treating YOU in New York State may have graduated thirty years ago and never taken a continuing education course.

Interestingly, a law requiring physical therapy continuing education in New York State was signed by Governor Patterson only a month ago. Since that time I have scoured the Internet and NYSOTA website for word on the OT continuing education bill and have not found anything.

It is unfortunate that the OT bill could not have been combined with the physical therapy bill for continuing education. I am not sure if there were reasons why this could not happen - I have forwarded the question to NYSOTA and if they respond I will post the information here.

For now consumers of occupational therapy services are not as protected in New York State as they should be. The lack of consistency of continuing competency requirements on a state by state basis in the United States underscores the importance of the NBCOT model as a national standard for continuing competency.

Consumers and practitioners both need to lobby their State Senators and Legislators so that these bills can be moved out of committee and to the floor for voting.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Deconstructing the myth of clothing sensitivity as a 'sensory processing disorder'

Please note first that there is no formally recognized clinical designation of  'sensory processing disorder.'   It is a term constructed by occupational therapists that has not been formally recognized by the larger medical community. In our clinic we receive many referrals from local pediatricians when parents have concerns about children being overly sensitive to their clothing.  Most often the children referred are from four to seven years old and the families are severely disrupted by the children's behaviors and responses to clothing issues.  Commonly, children will have severely constricted tolerance for certain outfits, want to wear the same clothes repeatedly, complain that clothing is itchy/scratch/bumpy/wiggly/ouchie, and this all leads to disruption of daily dressing routines.  There is no doubt that the behavioral concerns are very real. The pediatricians tend to be appropriately conservative and provide families with good behavioral management suggestions
Read more

On retained primitive reflexes

Each year I receive several emails from colleagues about 'retained primitive reflexes.'  I am also seeing an increased number of reports from local 'health care' providers who are documenting these alleged problems so I thought I would write a summary of my opinion on this topic.   Predatory 'health care' providers including some OTs, PTs, chiropractors, and behavioral optometrists are creating a new 'market' for treating this alleged 'problem.'  Parents should be very wary of these practitioners and other professionals should challenge these practices whenever they are seen. The following is the kind of information that causes concern and was provided to me by a colleague as a sample from a student's IEP: The student continues to demonstrate the following retained primitive reflexes that at times interfere with his ability to demonstrate appropriate adaptive responses: Fear Paralysis Reflex, Moro Reflex, Palmer Reflex, Tonic Labyri
Read more

Twenty years of SIPT - where do we go next?

Standardized tests are periodically discarded or updated because the normative group that the test was developed around may have changed characteristics. I am unaware of any 'industry standards' regarding the life expectancy of standardized tests; rather, professionals in a field tend to come to consensus about the relative usefulness of tests on their own. I would be interested in knowing what other therapists think about the Sensory Integration and Praxis Tests - which were published in 1989. I became certified in the administration of these tests seventeen years ago. At first I found them highly useful but the more I gave the tests the more I understood the limitations. Now it has gotten to a point where I do my best to discourage people when they ask for this test - not just because of the inherent weaknesses of the test construction but also because of how old the norms are. There have been some legitimate concerns with the tests including extremely poor test-retest re
Read more