Foot Health Practitioners - what are they

I think you will find that ALL courses are run by "businessmen"

 

David S,
When I see questions such as this

it tells me that others do not understand the function of the HCPC and see it as a punative organisation.

The HCPC was not created for the benefit of the practitioner, it was created to protect the public by maintaining standards. It does not monitor standards as it cannot police the whole of the Regulated sector.

HCPC Registrants are treated as professionals and are taken on trust. When a Registrant signs the form to renew their registration they agree to practice to HCPC standards and the HCPC assume that they will do just that.
It is incumbent on all registrants to practice to the highest standards they can bearing in minds the practical and logistical limitations of Best Practice.

The HCPC is reactive not proactive and will therefore only intervene if it receives a complaint about a Registrant.

You asked

When I trained the 3 year F/T courses that were approved by the Council for Professions Supplementary to Medicine, leading to State Registration, were the gold standard. Only those completing such a course were eligible for employment in the NHS.
In those days the SRCh letters were recognised by public and other health professionals as a benchmark.

To answer your question

Judging by some of the hatchet jobs I have seen created by non-regulated sector I would say that anything that makes these practitioner up their game would be very welcome.

When the HPC came into being several of the grandparented in my locality poured away their Gigasept, threw out their glass bead sterilisers and went over to using autoclaves for the first time in their practice history. surely this has got to be seen as an improvement in practice standards?

regards

Catfoot

 

I do not know if this applies to all FHP insurance, but mine specifies in its' terms and conditions that current 'best practice' in terms of sterilisation must be adhered to in order to be covered - ie ultrasonic bath then autoclave etc. And we were told to abide by this in no uncertain terms on my course.

 

Hi Skigirl,

Look up your insurance broker on the companies house website, you will see who the Directors are. You may find the Directors of your training school are also Directors of the insurance brokers who sold you your insurance, so they can say what they like.........anything for money.

Question....does your autoclave have to have a printer attached to it?

 

Correct Steve, but universities acquire monies from the Govt, and of course the overseas student (who ususally pays about treble for everything). And then of course, also the british students. And then of course companies buying services (research, etc) from the universities

What I meant by businessmen......are private businessmen who invest their own private money to make money. Regardless of ethics, etc. As long as they make a profit, that is all that matters.

 

Mark, what were your reasons for deregistering yourself from the HCPC? Why do you want to use a title that you know is protected by law - do you know the trouble you can get into for doing that, with insurance claims, etc? Not to mention the HCPC?

I am sure you have not lowered your stanards since deregistering, but still its not fair on your clients for misleading them. Its not fair on anyone for that matter.

Mark, if I was you, I would make it a priority to sort that out.

 

New Zealand practitioners tend not to worry about what's going on over in blighty too much. They generally are not aware of the mish-mash of standards that make up UK footcare industry and assume we all have the same BSc Pod.
Having escaped last year, I don't worry anymore as I view the snow capped southern alps from my office window.

 

Ok. That is a very serious accusation and I invite you to substantiate this or withdraw it immediately with an unreserved apology. You are in breach of both the Society's and HPC's Code of Conduct as well as the guidelines on this site as you allege that I deliberately mislead my patients.

You are either extremely stupid and ill-informed or deliberately malicious and antagonistic - I would be grateful if you would now inform Craig/Admin of your HPC registration number and I will consider your response before deciding on further action.

Sincerely
Mark Russell

 

Mark,
I am curious as to why this poster has to do anything?

According to the Privacy Policy on this site if you have a complaint about another member then, as I understand it, Admin/Craig will release their details to you and you can look it up for yourself.

Job done.

regards

Catfoot

 

Please correct me if i am incorrect in the following.

Witth the introduction of the HPC now the HCPC those that were previously on the State Register could transfer onto the HPC automatically.
Under certain conditions those not eligible for State Registration could be granted HPC registration via Grandparenting. After a specific date, cant remember, the HPC replaced the State Register.

From that date It was prohibited to use the following Titles if you were not on the HPC HCPC registers:

Podiatrist

Chiropodist

So my understanding is that if you are NOT on the HCPC register then you ARE PROHIBITED BY LAW to use the titles:

Podiatrist

Chiropodist

Please, as i have already stated, correct me if i am incorrect in this.

David:drinks

 

DAVOhorn,
I agree with everything you say.

However, I also stand to be corrected.

regards

Catfoot

 

That's the position as far as I'm aware David. Unless you know differently, of course.

 

Dear Mark,

I will ask the simple question then.

Why do you still use the title Podiatrist to describe yourself, this you have described in a previous post as being the Title you use?

I have known you for a few years now so have some knowledge of your reasons for deregistering, so i am still left a bit perplexed by your use of the title Podiatrist.

Best wishes

David :drinks

 

Why not just be Sattvic?

 

Very simply David - to attract prosecution, in the hope of forcing an amendment to the existing legislation. I have detailed the reasons for doing so on a number of occasions over the last year and have published correspondence with the HPC and their solicitors and I presently await their response regarding proposals to a suggested legislative amendment. You can find said correspondence on Arena and also on my blog http://mark-russell.net/Blog/index.php/2012/06/20/sans-regulation/ - my patients also have a hand-out explaining my position and reasons for doing so - as do all my partners, including all referring agencies, insurance providers and suppliers - who I am grateful to say have been extremely supportive.

Best wishes

 

Mark,

As i said i am aware of the above, but LOVEFEET probably is not.

I was surprised by the strongly worded threat of action for potential defamation of your goodself.

He asked, was it not misleading to use the title Podiatrist which you currently have no legal right to use.

But as you stated just now you have informed all interested parties of your actions, so no attempt to mislead has been made. Should LOVEFEET have not been aware of this, then he is ignorant not malicious.

I was, personally, very surprised by the abruptness of your response to his post.

A simple statement , as you have just made to me , is all that was needed to inform him of your correct position in this matter.

I personally support your challenge of the current status of protection of title but not of task/activity. The current status is not a means of protecting the public from people who are not trained to a tertairy level of education and competency.

A friend achieved HPC reg via grandparenting even though he had less than 18 months in practice as a SMAE trained Chiropodist. HoHum

regards

David:drinks

 

Thank you for the advice, David. I think I would like to hear from Lovefeet before making any further submissions on this matter. Perhaps he/she might be minded to discard their anonymous moniker before posting again otherwise I think we can just assume they are just another unpleasant troll who has nothing more to offer than the squalid, unprofessional and unhelpful bile that is so characteristic of certain posters who seem to think exporting their views from another forum is appreciated by the rest of the profession.

Kindest

 

Hello David

You were not the only one. It's not a tact or trait that I favour, however I think it was warranted on this occasion. It is now four days since the person who calls themselves "Lovefeet" has posted. If you look at his/her posting history, you will note he/she joined Pod Arena only this month and all 27 posts have been inflammatory and/or defamatory - and on the same old topic that the snip and growl brigade have been languishing in for as long as I can remember - the unregistered or FHPs or quacks - whatever you care to call those who practise chiropody but without having the same educational qualifications as you or I.

I regret to say the internet has given them a ready platform for their diatribes. Like most things, the internet can be used as a force of good - to educate and communicate in a positive manner, like the majority of topics on Pod Arena for example. Or it can be used negatively or destructively - to harass, belittle or to humiliate - the current anti-Islamic video being a prime example. Each of us has the choice whether to make a positive or negative contribution and I guess that choice is governed by a complex, multifactorial set of reasons. Perhaps mischievous or even malicious or vexatious. Only the person posting such material can answer that one – but the sum effect is a negative one, whatever way you look at it.

Like many of the contributors on this forum, I am getting old and rather fed up at the constant bickering and sniping many of those engage in on a regular basis. It has become their raison d’être and I find it both disheartening and wearisome, primarily because it denigrates the profession that I care for so much. As it is conducted on an open forum, it taints the many fantastic practitioners in our profession by association – at least in the public’s eye. And that is a great shame.

Some contributors tend to spend a great deal of time lamenting their (perceived) lowly status in the order of things – blaming their unhappy situation on those who they perceive to be inferior to them. I see the same minority in the orthopaedic profession doing the same to us. It serves no one well and the public, generally, are much more discerning than these folks give them credit for – and will continue to take their trade to those who give them the better service – more often than not the very ones who are being targeted by the agitators in the first place.

I don’t know who “Catfoot”, “Lovefeet” & etc are and nor do I care, but if I were a member of the public who happened to visit their surgery and experienced the attitude they display on these forums, I would avoid them at all costs in future. Having read the former’s comments recently to someone with Multiple Sclerosis (and I have no idea whether the original poster was real or imaginary either), one can readily form the view that there something more odious and unpleasant lurking beneath the proffered view of the consummate professional. I know Syd Kippen has remarked on this insecurity that is characteristic of a small minority of our profession – and it probably always will be so - but they are one of the factors that tether podiatry in the UK and hold back progress. If the HPC were really interested in safeguarding the public and promoting the professions, they could do a lot worse than monitor the forums as a proactive method.

What can we do about it? Nothing probably - you cannot reason with the mad or insane or those with severe personality disorders. Not down the broadband connection anyway. Until the HPC "thought police" get their act together or the moderators take a more strident line, we can simply ignore them. Or pity them, or both.

Kindest