http://otconnections.aota.org/search/?o=DateDescending&tag=play,OT+Practice,Older+Driver,Living+Life+to+Its+Fullest,social+media,elections,administration&orTags=0Search resultsen-US7.x Productionhttp://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/99/t/16543.aspxFri, 24 May 2013 11:45:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:16543mirma/Public_Forums/f/99/t/16543.aspx0  hi everyone, I would like to network regarding international study programs, specifically, OT and associated allied health programs your colleges/universities might have. I am Associate Professor and Graduate Coordinator at Brenau University in Gainesville, GA. We started a course entitled Global Health Perspectives and have gone to the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico going on 12 years. The course is mostly graduates although undergraduates can take the course also, any student can enroll, and mostly have been nursing, OT, although have also had psychology, pre-med students attend. We can take up to 20 students, and OT now the predominates with 2 faculty members, this year, I had the course myself with a TA. We go for 1 week during our Spring Break which is usually the first week in March. Any information to share regarding international study, specifically course content, international fieldwork experiences, student research-thesis, mentoring, & faculty partnerships, is appreciated. http://otconnections.aota.org/members/sjmccollom/activities/default.aspx?ActivityMessageID=cf4d3cd0-bd55-41fa-8945-fe7c5f1890e8Fri, 24 May 2013 06:02:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:sjmccollom/members/sjmccollom/activities/default.aspx?ActivityMessageID=cf4d3cd0-bd55-41fa-8945-fe7c5f1890e8I am interested in a mentor to help me through the process of applying and running for the ASD Steering Committee. If anyone would be interested, please contact me at sjmccollom@eagles.usi.edu in Assembly of Student Delegates http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122253.aspx#122253Fri, 24 May 2013 04:06:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122253alejandroduran/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122253.aspx#122253                                                                         San Diego and Control Group Two (Part 2 of 2)               The event recounted by Kathy can be explained as a consequence of my thesis: The result of the processes of knowledge acquisition in this profession leaves its members ill-equipped to deal with philosophical diversity. The fact that, according to Kathy, Dr. Alterio has been mischaracterized with descriptors such as “vicious”  and “trouble-maker,” and that Kathy’s follow up question was not worthy of being addressed except through logical fallacy are evidence of this.                Kathy’s experience, however, does more than just provide us with the similitude of a controlled experiment. It is the equivalent of a hidden-camera investigation. It suggests that the leadership cannot distinguish between critiques of the social justice requirement and the people who are against the requirement. Simply being someone who is against it means your critiques have no legitimacy, because, apparently, critiques against the establishment cannot have any legitimacy.                 Kathy elegantly exposed this kind of fallacious thinking with her own question: “Was I supposed to be UNconfused when she stated that the others who had like questions were ‘trouble-makers’ and ‘vicious’ on OT Connections?” All the evidence reviewed for this post suggests that the answer to this question, in occupational therapy’s intellectual culture, is that by even admitting one is confused, it says to the leadership that you are not the right kind of person. People who claim to be confused by the pronouncements of the leadership on issues of social justice are just troublemakers who do not care about disabled children getting services. And so, the Ethics Commission can still consider itself as adhering to the Code of Ethics’ values of inclusion and diversity by injecting social justice into the Code of Ethics. This is because only those people who do NOT count are against such a requirement. In occupational therapy’s intellectual culture, “diversity” means all the different people who agree with the establishment, and “inclusion” means the exclusion of those who disagree with it. http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122252.aspx#122252Fri, 24 May 2013 04:04:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122252alejandroduran/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122252.aspx#122252                                                           San Diego and Control Group Two (Part 1 of 2)               My masters in occupational therapy will be my third graduate degree. And counting my BA, it will be my fourth degree in four different disciplines. I think this experience gives me the background to make an important comparison about the intellectual culture in occupational therapy. And that is that it is the most defective of anything I have experienced in terms of its close-mindedness and hostility to competing perspectives. I have also never encountered so many mean-spirited academics. This mean-spiritedness is always related to the inability to deal with philosophical diversity.               Since I started my USC indoctrination website and since I have been writing about the goings on in this forum, my hope has been that the intellectual elite in this profession would start looking at themselves in the mirror; that they would start taking responsibility for the culture they have created, and stop blaming others for their own inadequacies.               One of the questions I have brought up before is if style matters on issues of philosophical diversity when communicating with the occupational therapy leadership and establishment. The well-documented evidence is conclusive that style of communication makes no difference. The courteous presence of Dr. Alterio in these forums has served as a perfect control group to test the hypothesis regarding communication style. I have referred to him as The Control Group precisely because of this. I will now have to refer to him as Control Group One.               At the San Diego conference last April we got to observe Control Group Two: this is Kathy, another person who has been unfailingly courteous in these forums.               According to Kathy’s recounting, she approached the Ethics Commission member who mentioned social justice in her talk to follow up on a question by Dr. Alterio. Instead of an answer to the question, what Kathy got was criticism of the questioner. This is a textbook case of the logical fallacy AD HOMINEM: it is a form of reasoning that attacks the person rather than dealing with the substance of the issue.              Because the members of the Ethics Commission are a group of people who do not make themselves available for questions and do not really participate in this forum, the significance of whatever information we get about them is SUPER amplified.              Kathy’s recounting of her experience at the conference reflects very negatively on the Ethics Commission. If its members cannot answer questions about one of the most important decisions they have made, and instead respond to complete strangers by mischaracterizing another AOTA member’s participation, one of the things this should suggest to them is that their decision on the matter was ill-chosen. http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/1261/p/16523/122251.aspx#122251Fri, 24 May 2013 03:59:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122251kewright19/Public_Forums/f/1261/p/16523/122251.aspx#122251 Sarah, I actually just read a great article that addresses difficult client encounters. The article was a required reading for my clinical reasoning class. The article by Essary and Symington (2005), suggests utilization of the BATHE technique (assess the background situation, assess the patient's affect, determine the problem that is most troubling for the patient, evaluate how the patient is handling the problem, convey empathy) in difficult patient situations (p. 51). The article further provides practitioners with possible communication tools as well as suggestions for the demanding patient, angry patient, silent patient and seductive patient. I enjoyed reading this article, as I'm sure you would appreciate it as well! As for OT's making mistakes, or any professional for that matter, I'm sure everyone has made at least a mistake or two, if not more. No one individual has all the answers, if this was the case, there would be no need for a medical team! Such teams are necessary, because we learn from each other and grow together as professionals. Like you said Sarah, we are and always will be, life-long learners! Kristen Wright, OTS The University of St, Augustine kewright19@gmail.com Essary, A. C., & Symington, S. L. (2005). How to make the "difficult" patient encounter less difficult. JAAPA, 18(5), 48-54. http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122250.aspx#122250Fri, 24 May 2013 01:42:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122250rdizazzo/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122250.aspx#122250 This entire journey has been extremely unsettling but I truly have no words for what just occurred, although I sadly can’t say I’m surprised. Linda, you spoke of fortitude and I couldn’t agree more. “Courage is not defined by those who fought and did not fall, but by those who fought, fell and rose again” (Anonymous). I have difficulty wrapping my head around the idea that those we presented this motion to cannot see the danger this terminology presents to our profession. We are a part of this organization and we will continue to stand for what we believe. http://otconnections.aota.org/AOTA_Blogs/b/pulsecheck/archive/2013/05/23/sneak-peek-aota-39-s-web-site-redesign.aspxThu, 23 May 2013 19:30:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122223syamkovenko/AOTA_Blogs/b/pulsecheck/archive/2013/05/23/sneak-peek-aota-39-s-web-site-redesign.aspx0 If you’ve noticed a lack of posts recently on the Checking the Pulse blog, I want to reassure you that your AOTA Web editor has not been sleeping on the job. Nope, instead of a nap I have been part of a team at AOTA that is in the final stretch of the AOTA Web site redesign ! That’s right— we are redesigning www.aota.org . We’ve been working on the project for months and, now that we’re ready to launch the site this summer, things are really getting busy at AOTA HQ. If you were at the Annual Business Meeting at AOTA’s Conference you’ve already seen a sneak peek of the new design (if you weren’t there, don’t worry I will share some screenshots below). But the redesign’s goal was not just to make the site prettier (ooh, shiny new things), but also make it easier to find what you are looking for. As you might know, we have tons of resources on our Web site and we want to make sure you can find them quickly and efficiently. Although I will try to keep up on my blogging in the next couple of months, if I continue to slack, I want to make sure you know about some amazing AOTA blogs that you can read instead . OT Notebook : The newest AOTA blog on the block is written by the associate editor of OT Practice Andrew Waite. He has spent a lot of time shadowing OTs and he will blog about what he has learned and experienced. Media Relations : Our media relations manager Katie Riley continues to post tips and ideas for getting OT in the news. It’s not as complicated as you may think. Blog by Elin Schold-Davis : Elin is AOTA’s Project Coordinator of the AOTA Older Driver Initiative and she blogs about topics related to driving and community mobility. There are more AOTA blogs, so better yet  just click this link and see what’s newest in AOTA blogs right now. Ok, so are you ready from some screenshots? These are not 100% final, but I thought it would be a great sneak peek for our blog readers. We based the redesign on extensive research as well as surveying thousands of members for their opinions on the design. It was truly a team effort! Front page: Practice Areas Page: Autism Page: We hope you’ll enjoy the new site when we launch it this summer and that it will make things easier for you to find. Ok, back to web testing for me (and/or napping) (I promise it’s testing) (although a nap would be nice) (nope, just testing). http://otconnections.aota.org/members/cindyotr/activities/default.aspx?ActivityMessageID=d5c37ec4-0381-40b1-b742-0da9b9673088Thu, 23 May 2013 19:01:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:cindyotr/members/cindyotr/activities/default.aspx?ActivityMessageID=d5c37ec4-0381-40b1-b742-0da9b9673088I have been a school OT for almost 30 yrs. I am now going to an out-pt clinic to start a peds program. Anyone working in out-pt peds?? in Pediatric Occupational Therapists http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122244.aspx#122244Thu, 23 May 2013 18:57:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122244roncarson/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122244.aspx#122244Based on comments, I almost guarantee there is much nashing of teeth about many of these conversations. Heck, in the beginning there was much derision about airing our laundry in a public format. I even received criticism from a certain member about being consistently negative. It's interesting watching the evolution... ________________________________________ From: Christopher J. Alterio [bounce-cjalterio@aota.org] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 2:21 PM To: general@aota.org Subject: RE: [general] Motion 2 Ethics Revision- Social Justice To address Ron's question, I am hopeful that AOTA does not regret creating this forum because actually this is a demonstration of the value and wellspring associated with open communication. I have divulged the Ethics Commission response in its entirety and I think that other participants here raise valid questions. I think it is reasonable to ask about the Ethics Commission process of investigation. The primary reason in my mind for asking about this process is because I would like to have a faith in AOTA and in the Ethics Commission. I will not draw any conclusions until I hear about the process. There may be great reason to have faith in this determination. What is not known at this moment is if their investigation involved an external audit or review as would seem to be appropriate given the points raised. This is precisely why I also emailed Executive Director Fred Somers because I thought it might be important to conduct some external review. So, I would like to know if there was any external audit or review involved that also involved interviewing the person making the initial allegation about what happened. It seems that the response I received indicates that the initial allegation is spurious, or that it didn't happen, or that it was absolutely mis-characterized. There is a paucity of explanation in the response so it is difficult to know exactly what the actual detailed determination of this review (if it occurred) was. This seems to be a reasonable question because over the course of this lengthy debate and also having the opportunity to meet Kathy Grace in person I have developed a great respect for her. She has already stated how difficult the situation was and how difficult it was to even post about, and I give great weight to her statements based on her character and record as well as my own experience with her. I certainly don't want to discount her testimony out of hand, and I trust that anyone investigating this appropriately would have also taken pains to fully and independently review the allegation. I am hopeful that the Ethics Commission would be willing to address this in open forum, because transparent conversation is best with such matters. I will send the query privately as well though, simply because there does not seem to be a consistent demonstration of willingness to engage openly. So I ask in the spirit of searching for a reason to have faith: Can the Ethics Commission please share their process of investigation regarding Kathy Grace's allegation that has been posted and referenced in these forums? Christopher J. Alterio, Dr.OT, OTR http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122243.aspx#122243Thu, 23 May 2013 18:20:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122243cjalterio/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122243.aspx#122243 To address Ron's question, I am hopeful that AOTA does not regret creating this forum because actually this is a demonstration of the value and wellspring associated with open communication. I have divulged the Ethics Commission response in its entirety and I think that other participants here raise valid questions.  I think it is reasonable to ask about the Ethics Commission process of investigation.  The primary reason in my mind for asking about this process is because I would like to have a faith in AOTA and in the Ethics Commission.  I will not draw any conclusions until I hear about the process.  There may be great reason to have faith in this determination. What is not known at this moment is if their investigation involved an external audit or review as would seem to be appropriate given the points raised.  This is precisely why I also emailed Executive Director Fred Somers because I thought it might be important to conduct some external review. So, I would like to know if there was any external audit or review involved that also involved interviewing the person making the initial allegation about what happened.  It seems that the response I received indicates that the initial allegation is spurious, or that it didn't happen, or that it was absolutely mis-characterized.  There is a paucity of explanation in the response so it is difficult to know exactly what the actual detailed determination of this review (if it occurred) was. This seems to be a reasonable question because over the course of this lengthy debate and also having the opportunity to meet Kathy Grace in person I have developed a great respect for her.  She has already stated how difficult the situation was and how difficult it was to even post about, and I give great weight to her statements based on her character and record as well as my own experience with her.  I certainly don't want to discount her testimony out of hand, and I trust that anyone investigating this appropriately would have also taken pains to fully and independently review the allegation. I am hopeful that the Ethics Commission would be willing to address this in open forum, because transparent conversation is best with such matters.  I will send the query privately as well though, simply because there does not seem to be a consistent demonstration of willingness to engage openly. So I ask in the spirit of searching for a reason to have faith: Can the Ethics Commission please share their process of investigation regarding Kathy Grace's allegation that has been posted and referenced in these forums? Christopher J. Alterio, Dr.OT, OTR http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122240.aspx#122240Thu, 23 May 2013 17:07:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122240roncarson/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122240.aspx#122240 The big question is, now what?  Is it even possible for those of supporting removal of social ethics to be an effective voice to have it removed? If so, how? Kathy, Alex, Chris, etc., where do we go from here?   From: ljnelson [mailto:bounce-ljnelson@aota.org] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 12:51 PM To: general@aota.org Subject: RE: [general] Motion 2 Ethics Revision- Social Justice   Thank you, Kathy, Ron, Christopher, and Alex, for your fortitude in bringing these issues to our attention.   Linda http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122239.aspx#122239Thu, 23 May 2013 16:50:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122239ljnelson/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122239.aspx#122239 Thank you, Kathy, Ron, Christopher, and Alex, for your fortitude in bringing these issues to our attention.   Linda http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122230.aspx#122230Thu, 23 May 2013 12:26:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122230roncarson/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122230.aspx#122230 It’s times like this that I wonder if AOTA regrets creating OT Connections. I bet they have never been subjected to such collective criticism.   From: kgrace [mailto:bounce-kgrace@aota.org] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 12:37 AM To: general@aota.org Subject: Re: [general] Motion 2 Ethics Revision- Social Justice     The ethics commission looked into their own conduct and found their behavior of their panelists were appropriate? If judgment and perspective is under question why wouldn't the investigators seek assistance from outside the ethics commission? They gave no rationale of their findings? Sounds paternalistic.     The panelists apparently cannot maintain an objective view of the subject matter to engage in discussion.  Further, they do not seem to know how to uphold the very document they are presumed to be well versed in.    It was painful for me to write about the 04/27/13 ethics presentation. I am angry that I was placed in the situation to make that decision.   My view is that the agenda of AOTA leadership is questionable.   The leadership is stirring frustration, anger, and resentment in it's membership by ignoring pertinent discussion if they are feeding their own anger, that was demonstrated at the presentation in question. A couple of legitimate questions were viewed as coming from vicious trouble-makers.    Now more than ever, I am left wondering what private agendas are driving AOTA. This strikes to the very core of their credibility.    Kathy Grace     On May 21, 2013, at 536PM, Christopher J. Alterio wrote:   As Kathy Grace's posting about the Everyday Ethics presentation at the AOTA Conference has never been approved in this forum thread, I would like to refer readers here to the following link: otconnections.aota.org/.../122179.aspx In this link you can see Kathy Grace's report about what happened when she asked a question after the presentation and you can see my follow-up letter to the Ethics Commission.  I received notification today from the ethics commission, stating they received my letter to them dated May 3, 2013.    They stated that my concerns have been looked into and it was determined that all the panelists conducted themselves appropriately and professionally both during and after the presentation.   No other commentary was included. Perhaps Kathy Grace would like to respond - I would certainly welcome any thoughts or additional information. For purposes of continuity, it may simply be helpful to keep it in this thread which has more broad readership and makes it easier for everyone to follow. Christopher J. Alterio, Dr.OT, OTR http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122229.aspx#122229Thu, 23 May 2013 07:46:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122229alejandroduran/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122229.aspx#122229          Kathy’s post touched upon Principle 7 Subsections E and F of the Code of Ethics: ::::::::          “E.  AVOID CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR CONFLICTS OF COMMITMENT IN EMPLOYMENT, VOLUNTEER ROLES, OR RESEARCH.           F. AVOID USING ONE’S POSITION (EMPLOYEE OR VOLUNTEER) . . . IN SUCH A MANNER THAT GIVES RISE TO REAL OR PERCEIVED CONFLICT OF INTEREST AMONG THE PERSON, THE EMPLOYER, OTHER ASSOCIATION MEMBERS, AND/OR OTHER ORGANIZATIONS.” :::::::::: Notice that Subsection F requires avoiding conduct that just creates a “PERCEIVED” conflict of interest. Does anyone think that the members of the Ethics Commission violated that standard - the standard of avoiding the use of one’s position in such a way so as to create a "PERCEIVED" conflict of interest - by investigating themselves?          Additionally, does anyone think they used their positions in such a way so as to create a “REAL” conflict of interest by investigating themselves? One of the questions I would have in answering this is if, as Kathy mentioned, there was some independent finding of fact that included an interview of Kathy as part of its fact-finding mission. http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122228.aspx#122228Thu, 23 May 2013 04:36:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122228kgrace/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122228.aspx#122228 The ethics commission looked into their own conduct and found their behavior of their panelists were appropriate? If judgment and perspective is under question why wouldn't the investigators seek assistance from outside the ethics commission? They gave no rationale of their findings? Sounds paternalistic.   The panelists apparently cannot maintain an objective view of the subject matter to engage in discussion.  Further, they do not seem to know how to uphold the very document they are presumed to be well versed in.  It was painful for me to write about the 04/27/13 ethics presentation. I am angry that I was placed in the situation to make that decision. My view is that the agenda of AOTA leadership is questionable. The leadership is stirring frustration, anger, and resentment in it's membership by ignoring pertinent discussion if they are feeding their own anger, that was demonstrated at the presentation in question. A couple of legitimate questions were viewed as coming from vicious trouble-makers.  Now more than ever, I am left wondering what private agendas are driving AOTA. This strikes to the very core of their credibility.  Kathy Grace On May 21, 2013, at 536PM, Christopher J. Alterio wrote: As Kathy Grace's posting about the Everyday Ethics presentation at the AOTA Conference has never been approved in this forum thread, I would like to refer readers here to the following link: otconnections.aota.org/.../122179.aspx In this link you can see Kathy Grace's report about what happened when she asked a question after the presentation and you can see my follow-up letter to the Ethics Commission.  I received notification today from the ethics commission, stating they received my letter to them dated May 3, 2013.    They stated that my concerns have been looked into and it was determined that all the panelists conducted themselves appropriately and professionally both during and after the presentation.   No other commentary was included. Perhaps Kathy Grace would like to respond - I would certainly welcome any thoughts or additional information. For purposes of continuity, it may simply be helpful to keep it in this thread which has more broad readership and makes it easier for everyone to follow. Christopher J. Alterio, Dr.OT, OTR http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/5265/t/16540.aspxWed, 22 May 2013 19:05:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:16540mabel/Public_Forums/f/5265/t/16540.aspx0 Re: the new G-codes for functional reporting in out-patient settings---     What assessments are you planning on using when you are working on functional cognition with a client?    Do you plan to use the "Attention or Memory" impairment categories? http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/5265/p/15974/122222.aspx#122222Wed, 22 May 2013 19:02:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122222mabel/Public_Forums/f/5265/p/15974/122222.aspx#122222 You do not need to use a standardized test, but you must be able to objectively quantify your findings because you need to choose a severity index for the degree of impairment some one has at eval, for a goal, and at discharge.  A Composite Test such as the AMPAC will give you that score and it will be easier to translate into a severity index. http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/5265/p/15974/122221.aspx#122221Wed, 22 May 2013 18:58:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122221mabel/Public_Forums/f/5265/p/15974/122221.aspx#122221 I agree with using the AMPAC---you can either use the 6 "quick pics" or the full activity battery. http://otconnections.aota.org/members/erinwbrennan/activities/default.aspx?ActivityMessageID=3397dc64-f22e-415b-b506-0f7c50570e2fWed, 22 May 2013 01:01:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:27332mommyvolk/members/erinwbrennan/activities/default.aspx?ActivityMessageID=3397dc64-f22e-415b-b506-0f7c50570e2f I had the same question. http://otconnections.aota.org/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122180.aspx#122180Tue, 21 May 2013 21:36:00 GMT9079418d-4ee6-4590-87f3-c0cc4c3814cd:122180cjalterio/Public_Forums/f/79/p/9285/122180.aspx#122180 As Kathy Grace's posting about the Everyday Ethics presentation at the AOTA Conference has never been approved in this forum thread, I would like to refer readers here to the following link: otconnections.aota.org/.../122179.aspx In this link you can see Kathy Grace's report about what happened when she asked a question after the presentation and you can see my follow-up letter to the Ethics Commission.  I received notification today from the ethics commission, stating they received my letter to them dated May 3, 2013.    They stated that my concerns have been looked into and it was determined that all the panelists conducted themselves appropriately and professionally both during and after the presentation.   No other commentary was included. Perhaps Kathy Grace would like to respond - I would certainly welcome any thoughts or additional information. For purposes of continuity, it may simply be helpful to keep it in this thread which has more broad readership and makes it easier for everyone to follow. Christopher J. Alterio, Dr.OT, OTR