Today I read the article in Dynamic Chiropractic about the conflict between the Texas Medical Association (TMA) and the Texas Board of Chiropractic Examiners. The mds have brought suit against the chiropractic board for allowing chiropractors to diagnose. The TMA’s position is that diagnosis is part of the practice of medicine. They are going after alternative approaches that want to treat medical conditions without the expertise/license of an m.d. or d.o. and chiropractic is their first target.
Ordinarily, I would not get into a battle between mds and dcs but as I read the article, and with the events of the past few years, I began to wonder whether I should ignore it. Live and let live has not worked for us straights. We naively believed that if we got our schools and an accrediting agency we could go our way and the mixers could go theirs. But in the past 25 years since that battle began it has become obvious that the mixers are not interested in a live and let live philosophy. They are threatened by our philosophy. I think they know that we represent a position that organized medicine could get behind. Consequently, they are forcing their therapeutic philosophy on us whether we want it or not. I present as facts for that position:
1. They fought against and destroyed our accrediting agency.
2. They closed down two of our straight schools despite the fact that the graduates proved they were competent-passing state boards and being productive members of the profession.
3. They have forced the only remaining straight school to incorporate procedures that are in conflict with the non-diagnostic philosophy.
4. They are forcing the school to teach P.T.
5. They are pushing for a doctor of chiropractic medicine degree. Why would that be? Will we be forced to acquire/use that degree?
6. The are pushing for the right to prescribe drugs. Will that lead to the requirement to do so?
Unless you are blind or have your head in the sand, you can see what their intention is, for the profession and ALL of its members. We are not an alternative to them or a fringe aspect of the profession. We represent a major obstacle in carrying out their master plan. We have the exact position that the TMA has and a way to explain that approach to chiropractic, one that is consistent with both the medical viewpoint on this issue and true chiropractic.
Here is my question; should we offer our support to the TMA legal suit? Should we offer the ammunition, the testimony and whatever else they need in order to present a rational chiropractic approach to their position? Should we get involved as individuals, should Sherman get involved, should the FSCO? This TMA suit is the greatest threat to the master plan of ACA/CCE/NBCE for controlling the profession and turning it into a branch of medicine. I would like some input. I believe this suit may be the last hope to preserve chiropractic as BJ and DD envisioned it. For this reason I believe that those who would medicalize our profession will stop at nothing (and I mean nothing) to accomplish their ends. Should we stand by and allow that to happen or should we take a stand and incur the wrath of perhaps thousands of chiropractors who would see us as a threat to their livelihood? I need some input from all of you and others who may read this blog.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I say support the TMA stance on the suit. I was so happy when I read the article and seriously hoped that the TMA would win.
ReplyDeleteDr. Strauss, I once heard you say that what are profession needs is a few more courageous Chiropractors. I believe this to be as true now as ever. This is not the time to be passive while the medically minded "chiropractors" distort and pervert our great profession. I agree with you completely and I will support the TMA suite.
ReplyDeleteAlthough it seems strange, and it is probably not their intention, the TMA seems to be defending straight chiropractic against those that would want to water it down. We would support any stance that defends our principle.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly (as far as the timing goes) our most recent 'THOT' of the Week for our practice members was titled "compromise" and can viewed online here: http://groups.google.com/group/thot-of-the-week?hl=en All are free to join the group if they so desire. We love you because you love the things we love. -Todd and Kelly
In a few paragraphs you have stated the obvious case for those who truely are Straight Chiropractors to stand and fight. I for one think that organizations should file amicus briefs in this case and do everything we can to put some "shots across the bow" of those who are soiling our unique and life changeing message. How about the rest of you Straights, or have you realized that no diagnosis means no insurance payment....time to see if you're more than words!!!!
ReplyDeleteI personally don't see anything wrong with the TMA requirement that chiropractors should not diagnose.
ReplyDeleteIt should actually be our requirement.
(Unless we want to stay in the insurance game).
Diagnosis sure does not help or influence our care.
We do not adjust one sickness much different than another.
I can see how we step on MDs toes, by trying to diagnose.
And with their level of accurate diagnosis - it'll be difficult to run short.
Yet - Remember diagnosis - is not our expertise, and it does not help our care. So I say let's give up the right to diagnose.
That will also reduce the level of confusion that we send to our people (pts).
As I see it, we only adjust healthy people - people who still have innate power within them.
Ronen Mendi, Israel
Being a recent graduate from NWHSU where diagnosis is taught as a "Must" and not choosing that road to travel, I would love to see a more unified group of chiropractors who choose not to diagnose or call themselves straight or objective straight to show the TMA that there is a group of chiropractors that choose not to diagnose.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the FSCO, Sherman College or F.A.C.E. is the start, but I want to see more access and visibility for the chiropractic students and recent graduates.
I support the TMA and a Resource or Organization that allows an online connection to more like minded chiropractors who choose not to diagnose and serve people chiropractic to allow a better expression of life for that reason alone.
I agree,we should support TMA's efforts in any way we can.Let's take the chiropractic profession back from those who have been trying to hijack it for the last 25 years.
ReplyDeleteI would support the TMA in their lawsuit, but I have just one consideration. I would be afraid that the ruling will be that chiropractors cannot diagnose (which would be good) and therefore people must see a medical doctor first and then get a referral to the chiropractor similar to the way that physical therapists need a referral in many states (which would be VERY bad).
ReplyDeleteI'm just throwing that out there but I'm not sure if it holds any weight. Does anyone have any thoughts on the issue?
I would be onboard with supporting the TMA, I was thinking the same thoughts when I read that article. I do agree with Matt though that the fear would be that they require a referral to see us. That would be bad. Playing medical Dr. is not what people want from us.
ReplyDeleteThe public's perception, including the courts, remains a medical mindset. If chiropractors are not allowed to diagnosis, then chiropractors will, undoubtedly, have to get a referral for the treatment of a medical diagnosis. And, insomuch as we don't want to lose control as a primary source of health care, the truth is, legally and objectively, chiropractors shouldn't be diagnosing or treating.
ReplyDeleteInstead of supporting them, our efforts should be focused on legislation that protects our right to remain a primary portal health care provider and not as a modality to medical treatment. The TMA, Mixers, and OSC are at war. And, yes, sometimes your enemy can help you defeat your other enemy, but supporting the TMA diverts our time/financial/focusing resources; especially since whatever support we lend will be edited and used against us. Therefore, I say our efforts should be focused on acquiring/maintaining a scope of practice that supports OSC AND the preservation as a primary health care provider.
Perhaps, if chiropractors aren't allowed to diagnose, then the public's perception might have a chance of changing and, at the very least, the insurance companies may stop paying for care.