For every one comment, observation or counterpoint I have posted there have been a number of visceral and venomous replies about me and my posts. Apologize? Indeed!
My income is irrelevant. The fact is, I make it fair and square within the laws and regulations of the land. I am merely questioning the ethics of opticianry trying to act like a health profession when in fact it is a trade. Opticians have no doctoral level research programs, publish no scientific journals beyond a few trade magazines, yet they feel they are somehow health professionals. And then a number of you wish to independently sight test, practicing what I like to label a 'minimalist approach' to eye care further confusing the public. As if there aren't enough ophthalmologists and optometrists around to generate scripts for you.
Your worst enemy is not organized ophthalmology or optometry. It is you. Opticianry needs to work to develop accredited training programs, doctoral level scientific programs, as well as standardization of licensure. It needs to de-commercialize itself. If I put anyone's nose out of joint by being brutally honest, I apologize. But those of you who attacked me should re-read your posts too and see where you have gone wrong in your commentary -- you have hardly acted civil yourselves and if anything, you have been crude and obscene.
Ahem.
The regulations that are being followed by optometry in this province were dictated by the government in 1974. Perhaps the opticians could launch a lawsuit against the government too? Frankly, they have no case because there is no collusion. If they did, I'm certain they would have been wise enough to launch a lawsuit 33 yrs ago. Or are they NOT smart enough??
They were not powerful enough.
And you know what, seriously stop questioning the intelligence of Opticians. This is probably the sixth or seventh time you made that backhanded comment. It really does nothing for you. There are some very bright Opticians out there. My father worked very hard to provide our family with what he has. He ran and still runs a successful business, and he didn't do it by being a dummy. I was in dispensing for years while getting by Honours in Business and then my Masters Degree. I am now thinking of doing my PHD. So you can stop with trying to make it seem like Opticians are just dumb hicks.
Not powerful enough? Surely the money they collect from their members is ample enough funding to launch legal action? I trust that the relevant organizations have commissioned a legal team only to find that there is no case. After 33 yrs I'm certain they would have done something.
I'm sure there are opticians with PhDs or some graduate degree. That is not my point -- please read my words and posts carefully before you attack me again. I am indicating that opticianry has no doctoral or post-graduate degrees in their training programs-- if there is one in North America, please post the link to the program on this forum. I do not believe they have any formal research programs either... or do they? Thank you.
No, you are indicating that Opticians are stupid. I have bit my tongue against several of your comments throughout this, but you continue to slide them in there.
Education does not make you more intelligent. By-products of education can help you become more aware, further your theoretical teachings, and open your mind. But these Opticians have been learning through practical and educational ways for years now. All they do is study lenses and frames. They regularly attend conferences and go for training to keep their skills up to date. Many of them have taken the initiative to further their education through taking University or College business courses.
I have nothing but respect for the trade, and I think you deserve them the same respect too.
WRONG AGAIN, EXCALIBUR!!
Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991
The Regulated Health Professions Act (RHPA) is an omnibus or umbrella law, which applies equally to 23 health professions. These professions include: Audiologists, Chiropodists, Chiropractors, Dental Hygienists, Dentists, Denturists, Dietitians, Massage Therapists, Medical Laboratory Technologists, Medical Radiation Technologists, Midwives, Registered Nurses and Registered Practical Nurses, Occupational Therapists, Opticians, Optometrists, Pharmacists, Physicians, Physiotherapists, Podiatrists, Psychologists, Respiratory Therapists, and Speech-Language Pathologists.Originally Posted by Excalibur
The instigators have been put on notice by a moderator. If you have not received an email, you are not one of them. Let's all take a deep breath and proceed as professionals. This donnybrook is over.
Now, where were we ?
Last edited by hcjilson; 12-17-2007 at 04:45 PM. Reason: brillient addition.
"Always laugh when you can. It is a cheap medicine"
Lord Byron
Take a photo tour of Cape Cod and the Islands!
www.capecodphotoalbum.com
It is interesting that the medical and the visual needs of a patient are often referred to as inseperable by many of the Optometrists that I know and in this case this optometrists (Excaliber) consistently points back to the fact that he has attended optometry school to attain his privledges when that is not the case. As far as I know a majority of the medical privledges given to optometry has come from successfull legislation and the same arguements that he poses are ones his profession has heard from ophthalmology. It is also interesting to note he consistently refers to ophthalmology and optometry not wanting or wanting something. As far as I know he is an optometrists and does not represent optometry, but is extremely arrogant to think his views spill over into ophthalmology.
The optometric techs he reffers to is a carbon copy of an ophthalmic tech which should not be confused. Ophthalmic Techs are considered health care professionals and write many journal articles and publish research side by side with ophthalmolgy. If you are lookign for more info check out http://www.jcahpo.org, in an ophthalmologists office a OMP (Ophthalmic Medical Professional) has all the very same privledges as an optometrist (with exception to prescribing or diagnosing). Optometry has emulated this with the optometric technician as a ways of fractureing this area of opticianry. These optometrists do not consider their optometric staff as professionals and as far as I am aware they publish no journals or do no research.
For any optician out there considering the optometric technician program take a good hard look at the type of person you will be working under.
1st* HTML5 Tracer Software
1st Mac Compatible Tracer Software
1st Linux Compatible Tracer Software
*Dave at OptiVision has a web based tracer integration package that's awesome.
You raise some very interesting points, and I agree with your post. Thank you for sharing them with me. Although opticians can (and some do) attend post-optician programs as you state, optician curricula do not have any university level training programs. Thank you for your post.
Harry-- are you aware of any optician programs that have doctoral level training? I am not aware of any. Optician programs are generally community college or correspondence programs... aren't they? There are certainly no optician programs affiliated with any university. Chiropractors are doctoral-level, but even they do not have any university-affiliated programs as far as I know. Optometry's legislative successes have been very successful too because this group has been very diligent at further their education -- developing research programs, attracting good applicants, etc etc which has very much helped the legislative lobbying efforts. This is something opticianry has been largely unable to do -- although there are pockets of highly educated opticians, as a group they are nowhere close to where they should be to be given the responsibility to assess people independent of others such as OMDs and ODs.
, done.
You seem to be caught up in this doctoral thing, my sister was just sworn in as a lawyer does she go around calling herself doctor, NO (by the way technically she is). Optometry has been trying to emulate Ophthalmology since forever ago, and now the optometric technician program is trying to emulate the ophthalmic technician program. If you want to be an Ophthalmologist go to med school, sound familiar? Instead of emulateing opticians are chooseing to create a whole new model of refraction only visits. This is not as you suggested independent of a health assesment, it is just independent of a health visit from every refraction which is overkill in some circumstances.
You seem to like to ignore the insignificance statistically of pathology in the segment of the population that opticians want to sight test. (considering that the person should have been tested at some point before and the screening). I would bet that their are more OD's doing damage down the road from me at the 2 for $69.95 Americia's something that see patinets every 5 minutes and in some cases are running between two lanes. I wonder how muach pathology they miss? Independent sight testing can and will be done it's a shame you have nothing constructive to say about it, and yet you keep voiceing your opinion about it here like you are some sort of guru on the subject.
By the way if a patient needs a medical exam why would they opt to go see you rather than an OMD?
If you can answer that question truthfully and not see how opticians can play a roll in independent sight testing, I think we did beat this horse dead.
1st* HTML5 Tracer Software
1st Mac Compatible Tracer Software
1st Linux Compatible Tracer Software
*Dave at OptiVision has a web based tracer integration package that's awesome.
http://www.opt.indiana.edu/ - Correct me if I am wrong but that is an Optometry school. Dr. Clifford Brooks a great OD teaches opticians at that school if I am correct. He is also author to many books that have been used in various optometry programs. Again not all optometrists have the narrow views that you seem to have towards my profession. You also mentioned in a previous post that you could have gone to medical school if you had wanted too. Many of the opticians on this board that you refer to as uneducated could have done many other things but chose opticianry as a career. I know 2 Phd opticians, 2 lawyer opticians, Nurses as opticians, and even doctors from other coutries as opticians. Many countries have more respect for opticianry as a profession than you do and in countries their is no such profession as optometry. Your profession is the baby on the block. Your professionn has done man things right and just as many wrong. Wait a few years nad the supply of OD's will be through the roof, their are already far to many OD's and the corporate OD far outweights the private practice OD even today, the future of optometry and opticianry are far more intertwined than you would like to imagine, but like you said corporate opticianry has been our biggest enemy, you are right, but often optometry has sided with corporations to help keep the profession down (most notably in the cases involving licensure) even to this day you hire and use unlicensed untrained individuals in your offices. This has lead to rampant devalueing of both our services, maybe when the dust settles we might both be working for Walmart, you will be my boss and make more money, but you won't be any happier than me and chances are I will give you a hard time then as I am now.Originally Posted by Excalibur
1st* HTML5 Tracer Software
1st Mac Compatible Tracer Software
1st Linux Compatible Tracer Software
*Dave at OptiVision has a web based tracer integration package that's awesome.
Forgive me, Excalibur, but yes there are. It's a BSc in Ophthalmic Dispensing.
http://www.city.ac.uk/optometry/programmes/ugrad/bsc%20aod.html
You're welcome.
OK.. here we go again...
you haven't read my posts carefully enough.
Dispensing opticians are known as optometrists in the U.K.
You are referring to practitioners in the U.K.. I am referring to practitioners in North America. Opticianry is largely taught by correspondence or at community colleges in N. America. They are not taught at university or college level.
Me be your boss? Impossible! You would be my boss, n'est pas? ;)
As I've indicated before, I can hire one optician at $30/hr or hire two certified optometric techs for $15/hr each. That gives me 2 people for the price of one. The two together can cover more 'ground' than the optician most of the time. Because they are constantly consulting with me all the time during the course of managing our patients, we cover all of our bases really well.
As for your colleagues who changed from law or nursing to opticianry. Did they lose their license in their previous professions, or did they merely wish to change careers?
Yes, IUSO is an optom school. It is not a school of opticianry. There is no such thing as an opticianry school in any university in N. America.
As for how well optometry has done in North America-- I would say they've done very, very well. Every state has experienced practice scope expansion, and absolutely no retraction of scope.
In Canada, we have a huge shortage of ophthalmic surgeons. Optometrists provide the overwhelming majority of primary eye care in this country, and according to government authorities they do it very, very well. Just read the HPRAC report I cited in an another thread. In fact, optometrists in this country have extremely good working relationships with family docs so... if the family docs are referring more and more of their patients that isn't a bad thing, is it?
And how did you become such an authority on sight testing? Unfortunately, you wish to take eye care back to the proverbial Stone Ages by using a minimalist approach. Dial-spinning is not eye care however much you wish to believe it. I'm sure you're not a bad fellow, and (in a perverse way) I enjoy 'debating' with you but your posts are so poorly written they almost lack credibility. Nonetheless, you continue to emit a foul literary odor by continuing to post when I set this thread is dead.
Have you finished or what?
I am sending this thread to Roy Ferguson and Warren McDonald, both educators, and both opticians who hopefully will share some insight. As I have previously stated, Excalibur has made some excellent points, however I am not aware of what is currently available in the US educationally. It may take them some time to catch up on the 5 pages here. In any event they are the most well versed to speak on Opticianry and education today. I'm taking a back seat because I'm out of my league here. I would be embarassed to invite either of these gentle men into a cat fight so please excercise your manners. I have never been in their company and failed to learn something so please listen to what they have to say (if they care to comment)
Thanks from hcj
"Always laugh when you can. It is a cheap medicine"
Lord Byron
Take a photo tour of Cape Cod and the Islands!
www.capecodphotoalbum.com
I'm going to avoid commenting on much of what has been said in this thread for obvious reasons.... but:
1. Indiana University offers a two year associates degree in opticanry
2. UK BSc dispensing opticans are not optometrists, the link to the program at city university is a one year degree in opticianry. The Optometry program in the UK is a three year BSc Optom.
3. I really don't understand how anyone thinks that cost+plus is a good thing for optometry.
So then is opticianry bringing the academic stature of the school down or is optometry bringing the level of opticianry up from that school? Since they teach opticianry they are an opticianry school.Originally Posted by Excalibur
It is obvious you cannot seperate refraction from the health assesment. If this was the opinion of the optometrists that paved the way for you you would be an optician today. I am suggesting that optometry has evolved so far from what it was that their is a large gap between optometry and opticianry that needs to be filled. I think opticians can fill it well, you see to think that no one should fill it.Originally Posted by Excalibur
My posts don't need credibility, they are just opinion and conjecture. You on the other hand have doen irreperable damage to your credibility to the members of this board it seems. It's ashamed since you seem to think highly of yourself, it would have been nice to share your obvious wealth of knowledge with this board.Originally Posted by Excalibur
That is the same excuse used in the states to legislate medical privledges to optometrists. To an extent I agree it is nice to be able to see your local optometrist and have certain conditions treated and monitored without a trip to an ophthalmologist, but these medical privledges none the less have been granted by legislation. Some medical professionals think optometry does not deserve these privledges.Originally Posted by Excalibur
Sight testing to me is very similar, it can be done independent of an OD or OMD. This does not mean it should be done in lieu of a health assesment.
I don't think their would ever be a need for one, so it isn't necessary. You could say in a way that optometry is a doctoral level optician. :DOriginally Posted by Excalibur
No it seems you have more self destructing to do so I will continue to be exalted by your banter. As for my spelling I am glad to see it bothers you so, I will continue to ignore the spell check button.Originally Posted by Excalibur
1st* HTML5 Tracer Software
1st Mac Compatible Tracer Software
1st Linux Compatible Tracer Software
*Dave at OptiVision has a web based tracer integration package that's awesome.
WRONG, AGAIN! Please check simple facts so that I don't have to correct you so much. In the UK, the names are the same.
Dispensing opticians are known as dispensing opticians (DO's). Optometrists are known as optometrists ~ or ~ ophthalmic opticians. They are not called "eye doctors." This term is reserved for eye practitioners who graduate from medical schools.
In Canada, opticianry is taught at accredited colleges, such as Georgian or Seneca.
You're welcome.
At times, I wish I had the same restraint.More restrictions are obviously not good. The question is, is cost+ a good thing for the patient? The answer is No! Although, that was presumably the intention. Optometrists are humans and their practices are businesses. With cost+ there is no financial incentive to promote a better appliance. When you align patient benefit with practitioner benefit you will get a better result every time. (Unless your name is Excalibur.)Originally Posted by Oedema
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks