Thank you Brent for sharing the info on the student loan program benefits and history. I look forward to the day when we have enough OT/OTA practitioners to meet the demands. In my county alone, I often see waiting lists of 60-80+ children all under the age of 3 years who are not able to get OT services they have been determined to be eligible for and which would help save our economy future dollars by helping these children when the brain has a higher degree of plasticity.
Why is there such a long list? Because there is a tremendous shortage of providers and keep in mind, this is only one county. There are just over 100 counties in my state. We need to support education of OTs. There is tremendous projected growth in OT. This isn't about right/wrong or good/bad. This is about children and their parents who want to help them but don't know how. The role of OT in helping these families and children is vital.
Yes, lets not forget that the Government is now 100% in control of ALL student loans. In their infinite wisdom and under the pretenses of improving educational access, the Obama administration stripped ALL federal loans from the private sector. This will not be good for educational institutions.
Here's a good and short read about Marxism. Take a minute to read it and see if you see any similarities to what is happening today...
American Thinker
From: donahue <bounce-donahue@aota.org>Sent: 3/30/2010 8:38:11 AM
For those of us opposed to continued Government encroachment and America's growing dependence on Federal hand-outs, this is NOT the time to "move on". This is the time to continue advocating for people's independence and inter-dependence on themselves and each OTHER, not the Federal Government. Without doubt, there are hurting people who TRULY need assistance with health-related finances, but there is also a segment of our population willing to live at the expense of others without any significant contribution to the system supporting them. This parasitic segment will eventually drain us dry. In addition to cultural ethic of "I want what you have", there is also a growing belief that Government can and should meet everyone's desires and needs. History, proves that Government is unable to administer ANYTHING in a fiscally responsible manner. This healthcare legislations will prove no different. What promises to be the eventual take over of 1/6 of the U.S. economy will result in a financial drain of epic proportions. It is also a fundamental flaw to believe in the power of the Government to represent the individual. The Government is like a train in that it can only go where tracks are laid. Large bureaucracies have almost no room for individual wants or needs. The one entity that promises to get lost in this health care shuffle is the individual. While the tracks of change are laid and the train is at the station loaded with passengers, it is not too late to prevent its departure. From: Gail Fisher <bounce-gfisher@aota.org>Sent: 3/28/2010 1:26:05 AM To follow on "OTInRehab''s comment and move on, here are some ideas about how the new bill can create new opportunities. There is a big emphasis on wellness and prevention. That will help with cost savings and improve quality of life. There are funds for multidisciplinary teams to try innovative ways to manage chronic disease and reduce high cost medical expenditures. Think about the Well Elderly Program that USC tested that reduced medical expenditures in later months. Employers get grants to implement workplace wellness programs. Hospitals get penalized for readmissions and conditions acquired in the hospital that were preventable. For us, that means emphasis on fall prevention; evaluating problem solving, safety, and judgment; and caregiver training and consultation. If we can show the hospitals that we can prevent readmission or reduce decubiti or falls in the hospital and at home, we are golden. There are several pieces in the bill that promote community living rather than long-term institutionalizaion and provide supports to individuals and the states for that to happen. Home modifications, community accessibility evaluation/ consultation, life skills training, AT consultation and more are going to be needed. AOTA has done an excellent job in compiling the key aspects of the bill and their implications for occupational therapy in a 4 page document that is linked from the current front page of the website. Here is the link to the document http://www.aota.org/Practitioners/Advocacy/Federal/Highlights/Reform.aspx I spoke about health care reform and advocacy at the Mississippi state OT conference today in my role as AOTPAC board member. They gave me a warm welcome but many were wary about the bill. Some members came up to me afterwards and said they had been against the bill but didn't realize what was included in the bill and what wasn't in the bill (eg the public option). They said they needed to go home and educate their family members, that there is a lot of misinformation out there about this new law. Some remained wary. That is okay, we need to see how this plays out and raise concerns and fix things that don't work well. I like to focus on the possibilities, and I think there are many.We can be leaders in these areas if we choose to be. Gail Fisher AOTPAC Region III representative
For those of us opposed to continued Government encroachment and America's growing dependence on Federal hand-outs, this is NOT the time to "move on". This is the time to continue advocating for people's independence and inter-dependence on themselves and each OTHER, not the Federal Government. Without doubt, there are hurting people who TRULY need assistance with health-related finances, but there is also a segment of our population willing to live at the expense of others without any significant contribution to the system supporting them. This parasitic segment will eventually drain us dry. In addition to cultural ethic of "I want what you have", there is also a growing belief that Government can and should meet everyone's desires and needs.
History, proves that Government is unable to administer ANYTHING in a fiscally responsible manner. This healthcare legislations will prove no different. What promises to be the eventual take over of 1/6 of the U.S. economy will result in a financial drain of epic proportions.
It is also a fundamental flaw to believe in the power of the Government to represent the individual. The Government is like a train in that it can only go where tracks are laid. Large bureaucracies have almost no room for individual wants or needs. The one entity that promises to get lost in this health care shuffle is the individual.
While the tracks of change are laid and the train is at the station loaded with passengers, it is not too late to prevent its departure.
From: Gail Fisher <bounce-gfisher@aota.org>Sent: 3/28/2010 1:26:05 AM
To follow on "OTInRehab''s comment and move on, here are some ideas about how the new bill can create new opportunities. There is a big emphasis on wellness and prevention. That will help with cost savings and improve quality of life. There are funds for multidisciplinary teams to try innovative ways to manage chronic disease and reduce high cost medical expenditures. Think about the Well Elderly Program that USC tested that reduced medical expenditures in later months.
Employers get grants to implement workplace wellness programs. Hospitals get penalized for readmissions and conditions acquired in the hospital that were preventable. For us, that means emphasis on fall prevention; evaluating problem solving, safety, and judgment; and caregiver training and consultation. If we can show the hospitals that we can prevent readmission or reduce decubiti or falls in the hospital and at home, we are golden.
There are several pieces in the bill that promote community living rather than long-term institutionalizaion and provide supports to individuals and the states for that to happen. Home modifications, community accessibility evaluation/ consultation, life skills training, AT consultation and more are going to be needed.
AOTA has done an excellent job in compiling the key aspects of the bill and their implications for occupational therapy in a 4 page document that is linked from the current front page of the website. Here is the link to the document
http://www.aota.org/Practitioners/Advocacy/Federal/Highlights/Reform.aspx
I spoke about health care reform and advocacy at the Mississippi state OT conference today in my role as AOTPAC board member. They gave me a warm welcome but many were wary about the bill. Some members came up to me afterwards and said they had been against the bill but didn't realize what was included in the bill and what wasn't in the bill (eg the public option). They said they needed to go home and educate their family members, that there is a lot of misinformation out there about this new law. Some remained wary. That is okay, we need to see how this plays out and raise concerns and fix things that don't work well.
I like to focus on the possibilities, and I think there are many.We can be leaders in these areas if we choose to be.
Gail Fisher
AOTPAC Region III representative
Am I correct to understand that the OTs who do not want government involvement in healthcare or education also do not work in any settings that are dependent on governmental programs or dollars (i.e. receive monies from Medicare or Medicaid such as inpt/outpt/acute/rehab/long-term care/home health settings, educational settings, academic institutions where students would receive financial aid, etc)? Does anyone have the statistics on how many OT practitioners work in settings that do or do not receive governmental funds?
I am struggling with potential incongruence of people criticizing government management/funding yet working for an employer where there is a very high likelihood salaries, grants, etc. that you receive are coming at least partially from government funds.
If you sincerely believe government is not to be involved does this mean OTs who are working in these settings and upset or angry about reform are willing to walk away from their income stream or furthering their education? Are you willing to think that research intended to support occupational therapy or occupational science may be stopped if governmental funding is not available? How beneficial would that be for our clients and profession?
Integrity: the inside matches the outside; words match actions; typically is most easily preserved by using silence.
I am not saying life with or without government involvement is perfect or imperfect. I do believe we have a professional responsiblity to be aware of the potential incongruence of accepting a paycheck from an employer who receives government funding, if the words expressed to colleagues here are highly critical of that govt.
Maybe we will begin to see OTs who are not happy with governmental involvement begin to leave their jobs to support congruence with their words and actions . I'm interested in the outcomes that may produce. I wonder how that would help our clients. I wonder how that might impact the children of OTs afford higher education. I wonder how that would impact the social context of our country. I wonder how that would help our economy if people have less discretionary income. I wonder if that would mean fewer plasma screen TVs (whatever the toy of choice is) and lower utility bills with more family time. I wonder if that would mean more integral family relationships, more home schooling if people weren't working any longer.
I am not interested in receiving anti-Obama comments just as people may have considered it offensive and/or disrepectful to be anti-"any previous leadership". We will always have disagreements about political beliefs, that is what makes this America.
I am respectfully requesting that respondents refrain from making political statements and focus ONLY on how do we best help our clients and employers as well as work to advance our profession within the new reform. I hope participants can join me in leaving behind criticism of the government and move into the realm of brain-storming and problem-solving.
Brent, thanks for the link. It clearly shows that I am wrong about student loans not costing tax payers. However, the link also shows me that once again the Federal Government has great difficulty successfully managing programs in a cost-effective and efficient manner. So, I do not understand why people want the Government having even more control over and involvement in their lives. If the previous student loan programs are failing, what is it that makes people think that the Government will do a better job this time?
Isn't the Federal Gov is primarily responsible for much of the "mess" we find ourselve in? Didn't the Government create, manage and administer the Federal Student Loan program -the very program that is being criticized? If that program is such a mess, what assurance is there that this time the Government will do a better job?
You know, I really have NO problem with the Government trying to improve current programs, including healthcare. My complaint is that the current administration seems to think that the best solution to fixing problems is taking control from private enterprise and putting it in the hands of the Federal Gov. I have very little confidence that the Government is better equipped than private enterprise to provide cost-effective, efficient, competitive and diverse products and services.
Ron Carson MHS, OT
Ron,
I will take one shot at addressing the questions in this last post, although I realize they may be rhetorical. (Do you really want to understand why many Americans and many AOTA members hold different beliefs than you do?) When I say many I mean that I interpret the bottom line of most polls related to our current administration, the past administration and where citizens want to see us go next on key societal issues are pretty evenly divided. I have no evidence but assume the AOTA membership might be similarly divided in its beliefs.
I can explain my support for increased government involvement in health care insurance by answering two basic questions.
1. What can a government do for its citizens that citizens alone can't do and that private industry can't or won't do?
2. For those things identified in question 1, what should the government do?
To use student loans as an example, regardless of the method of administration or the political party in control, I believe the majority of politicians and administrations have supported the student loan program because private banks simply would not make the loans to most students because of their credit risk (no or limited income, no or limited credit history etc). The federal student load program therefore achieves what private industry can not or will not. Sure, our government is huge and there absolutely is much waste, fraud and abuse but the same is true in private industry.
The irony for me when I hear complaints about the new student load program is that it seems that where this particular program "went wrong" was privatization in the first place. The error is not a "government takeover" now. The error was believing that tax dollars could be more effectively spent by creating incentives for a no lose, money making venture for private banks and transferring all of the profit and none of the risk to private banks in the first place.
In regards to health insurance, our old system that has heavily relied on private insurance companies has resulted in millions going uninsured and facing the economic challenges of things like pre-existing conditions. The government can create a system where citizens have access to insurance rather than continue to rely on a more private system that cannot or is not interested in achieving that.
Now the "should" question is very complex (as evidenced by this discussion thread) and will not be solved here on OT Connections and probably not "solved" in the larger context. The "should" questions will only be answered through elections and political debate. I doubt that we will change many minds in this forum through posts that focus primarily on personal values and beliefs and what "should" happen.
I have appreciated the discussion of the pro's and con's of legislation here when it has led to sharing of information and discussion of how that information can be interpreted. I do hope that we tone down the political rhetoric and spin just a bit.
For every person that vehemently opposes the approach of our current administration there is one that supports it just as strongly. Both should be respected as citizens and patriots. I don't expect that this post will have any impact on your stance on what the government should and should not do, but I do hope it has provided insight as to why (on the two issues discussed here) I welcome more government control and involvement in my life.
Brent Braveman, PhD., OTR/L, FAOTA