I made the following speech at the 1992 OAA Leadership Conference. It might be worth reviewing after twenty years.


Roy
Several years ago the president of Tusculum College, wrote an article for the college newsletter that I found so profound that I clipped it out and posted it in my office. He related the following story:

A tiny city had been held under siege by a great army. For days, help from the outside had been cut off. The people inside the walls of the city were filled with despair. Some had given up hope and were only waiting for starvation to take its course. Others bickered among themselves and criticized their fellow citizens.

Near the edge of the city, just outside the walls, four men were huddled in serious conversation. Finally, one of the men addressed the others: "Why sit here idle until we die? If we return to the city we'll starve. If we remain here we'll be caught in the crossfire. Let us cross over to the camp of the enemy and stage a small battle of our own." These four men made some discoveries that all of us would do well to remember.

Outside the walls these men had refused to accept defeat. "Why sit here idle until we die? Let's be up and on the move. If we must die, let's die on foot with our weapons in our hands." These men had learned the value of helping themselves. The notion that the good life can be achieved without effort is a myth. We, as individuals and as a profession would be well served drawing from this.

When the men helped themselves, the "forces" began to work with them. Remember that ageless proverb, "God helps those who help themselves"? On that night long ago, the four men set out on their mission. They weren't prepared for what they discovered. The enemy camp was deserted, apparently abandoned in great haste. The enemy soldiers had departed in such a hurry that they had left all their provisions behind. In the night, the soldiers heard the noise of the four men approaching the camp. Thinking they were about to be overrun, they had fled.

When the men helped themselves, others worked with them. When the four men entered the enemy’s camp and discovered the abandoned supplies, they said, "This is a day of great rejoicing. Let's go into the city and get others to help us gather the food." When the besieged people in the city heard the report of the four men, they left the city to assist in taking over the enemy's camp.

There is a contagious quality to the courageous heart. While this principle may not work with mathematical precision, it is true that people are attracted to those who help themselves. Life tends to work this way. People follow those who struggle for good purposes. It is difficult to resist helping someone who is honestly working to help.

Now it's true that our struggles within opticianry are not the "life or death" variety that faced the men in the city under siege. But we do face challenges that are monumental. Our profession seems to be under attack from all sectors. From within are those who cry, "do nothing lest we incur the wrath of greater powers." From without are those who want to destroy opticianry for professional gain or simple greed. We are a profession under siege and seem to be surrounded by the enemy.

How has this been allowed to happen? As professionals we can proudly trace our history throughout centuries. Our group was large and strong enough to have withstood the division that came about when the dispensing optician and the refracting optician choose different paths. While the refracting optician pursued formal education and the right to create their own "lens measurements", the dispensing optician strengthened their historical and symbiotic relationship with ophthalmology. Now our world is rapidly changing. The once clearly defined relationship with ophthalmology is crumbling as more and more ophthalmologists enter the retail business of eyeglass dispensing. Optometry now attempts to claim as its own turf the dispensing of contact lenses and other skills of the dispensing optician.

Even in this competitive atmosphere the dispensing optician is experiencing a period of unprecedented growth and demand for professional services. Historically we've concentrated on passing along the science and art of our profession as always--father to son--or through closely guarded apprenticeship programs. This was possibly an acceptable training system in more lethargic times but now we find the skills and knowledge of our forbearers diluted as the demand for opticians increases and the hurried pace prevents the proper training of entry level personnel.

Who argues for the continuation of this archaic training system? There are many factions within the walls of opticianry who defend it on the historical basis of "it’s what we've always done". Others assert the privilege to "teach them the right way to do things". Or "We teach them the way WE do things:. A few honest individuals state in very closely guarded moments that they don't want their employees to "know more than they do".

From outside the walls of opticianry other arguments arise such as: "If they know more they'll be a professional threat to me". How about "the more they know the more we have to pay" school of thought? In the business world this is known as the "barefoot and pregnant rule". Certain sectors advocate that opticians are obsolete and that the profession should "forget optics, just concentrate on selling the second pair". The notion of training for "job specific skills" is popular even though it smacks of the thoroughly discredited Fredrick Taylor. You know of Taylor as the person who helped destroy Detroit with the "leave your brain at the door" management system.

There are disjointed groups within opticianry battling for expanded professional parameters such as sports and safety vision. There are those seeking to regain the right to fit contacts. There are those wishing to retrace and rediscover the refracting opticians' use of the phoroptor. Certain state opticianry groups are attempting professional recognition through licensing. Others are fighting ongoing and vicious skirmishes to retain the right to take and record a PD or determine what spectacle lens to fit without a refractionists' permission.

It's not that we as opticians lack the intelligence or desire to properly care for the public--for we have as evidenced by our long and valuable service. It's not that the consumer must be protected from an ignorant optician by a properly schooled refractionist. As we're all well aware there's a special humor in that statement! It's not that the will to learn is absent from our group since most state and national organizations require continuing education. What "IT" is is a common educational experience on which to build a professional identity. We, like the character from the Wizard of Oz, have the brains but lack the legitimacy bestowed by institutional learning. That is a weakness that we as a collective group must remedy.

What I would propose today is a simple first step that we as opticianry must take if we are to survive and grow as a profession. For too long we've labored under the misconception that professional knowledge can be imparted through the use of outdated, outmoded, sporadically applied apprenticeship training. Such a program may applicable to the blacksmith or plumber but we are neither. We are health care professionals. We are not salesclerks, not fashion consultants, not associates, nor any of the other titles bestowed on the incompetent to mask ignorance. We’re opticians. We are health care professionals who have both expertise and professional standards.

The path we must follow is not the easy route. While the easy road is wide and simple to negotiate it's also downhill, leading nowhere. The apprenticeship idea is antiquated, inefficient and a professional dead end. We are the last of the health care sector to cling to this concept and it's used daily to suppress our growth and threaten our existence. Our future and salvation lies in formal education. The example of "legislate then educate" set by early optometry cannot be emulated by opticianry. That path is now closed. We must have formal credentials to expand our scope of practice, and even to simply survive.

Today, I'd like to propose that this group of state leaders take the first of many daring steps and adopt a resolution calling for the elimination of the opticianry apprenticeship program within five or less years. In its place I would suggest a uniform educational growth plan outlining the absolute minimum requirements necessary to be an optician. The embryonic stage would consist of a 24-semester hour certificate program along with an internship of duration and experience level necessary to qualify for an additional 10 semester hours of experiential credit. The 24 hours would consist of college classroom instruction in such subjects as: Optical Theory, Optical Finishing, Ophthalmic Dispensing, and Contact Lenses. The lab portions could be performed during the 10 semester hours of internship. This program can be implemented with minimum cost and lead-time, especially in those states with existing accredited opticianry schools. Later, this certificate course can be blended into an A.A.S. degree in General Technology. What I'm outlining can only be considered a beginning, designed to establish a bridge between our current position and our future goals that must include even more formal education. This first program may be expanded, compressed or modified as our needs dictate but it must be taken if we are to survive as a profession.

Groups must be formed, state societies must cooperate with one another, internal differences must be set aside and most of all our national organization must provide some coherent long-term guidance to achieve this goal. It won't be easy.

Ignorance is easy. Surrender is easy. This is not. Our quest will involve long and protracted battles against foes which are well known and many yet to be discovered. All these obstacles will be overcome if only we can abandon our fear of the unknown and "stage a small battle of our own".

We have the expertise to carry out this plan located within the National Federation of Opticianry Schools. Call on them for a model program. Once it's outlined, let's pursue it with all vigor. That is how our professional growth will be achieved. Not through weekend "silver bullet" programs or company sponsored sales seminars. To be called an "optician" within the United States must become more than simply donning a white lab jacket with a nametag proclaiming ones status. It must be through formal education.

The Achilles heel for our profession is simply the lack of proper academic credentials. No matter what the argument, the educational sword is unsheathed and used with savage effectiveness. "Why should the optician be allowed to fit contacts, when I had to attend four years of professional school to learn how to do so safely?" is the thrust which we attempt to parry with "formal education isn't necessary to fit contacts". "Why should the optician be a licensed health care professional when they aren't even educated?" is a slash that we block with our forearms. "If they are indeed a true profession, why have they never bothered to educate themselves?" may be the spear aimed for our hearts. Isn't it time for us to include an educational shield in our battery?

Ladies and Gentlemen like the men from the city learned, there is value in helping ourselves. We have a professional choice to make: wait passively while we starve, or go forth and join battle. If we choose to fight, it must be for professional legitimacy through formal education. If we decide to take this strong and right position we shall find the "forces" are with us. Suddenly all our goals including, but by no means limited to, the fitting of contacts, use of the phoropter, and licensing come within easy grasp. Finally, if this small group gathered together here strikes out to upgrade and protect our profession others will join. You have the ability today to ignite a fire that will kindle desire and unite our entire profession. That is your mission and your challenge.