Why do you think osteopathic medicine does not receive the same level of respect in other countries like UK, New Zealand and Australia than in the USA?
Osteopathic medicine in the US enjoys the same benefits allopathic medicine does, then why havent other countries followed the US in adopting osteopathic medicine fully?
For example, allopathic medicine enjoys the same level of respect throughout the world. Why doesnt osteopathic medicine?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Why doesn't it receive the same level of respect? That's a two headed question. As an Australian Osteopath it could be said that osteopaths don't receive the same level as respect here as their US counterparts do, particularly when dealing with the occasional anal, elitist, attitude wearing medical practitioners. However most, if not all Osteopathic practitioners went into the profession knowing they were not considered equals to medical practitioners, along with the benefits of being expertly trained to master OMT. Australian, New Zealand and British Osteopaths use OMT 100% of the time and possess the diagnostic skills for when NOT to use it (equally as important as being good at the techniques themselves) and will refer accordingly if other modes of treatment are necessary. It could be said that while US Osteos have a higher level of 'respect' due to their eual footholding with MD's, most (from what we hear down under) Osteopaths choose not to practice OMT. Why is it that they choose not to use the element that distinguishes them if they are so well respected for it? What then, if they choose not to practice OMT, differentiates a US trained DO from a traditional allopathic school other than the lower entry scores and apparently easier admission to osteopathic schools? That element certainly seems to separate the Osteos from the medics in the eyes of non-US osteopaths, though I have to admit being envious at times of your increased rights in practice. As for us osteos without full practice rights we are struggling to publicly distinguish ourselves from Chiropractors and Physiotherapists.
So in answer to your question, it seems 'respect' in your eyes comes from acceptance by the wider medical community by being an equivalent qualification to an MD.
That is purely an issue of medical politics and the Australian Medical Association will NEVER allow anyone to hold an equivalent qualification to them. Consider yourselves fortunate that the US Osteos had the numbers to be able to receive increased practice rights when they did which is a luxury other nations will unlikely be afforded.
There is only one form of respect that matters - that which comes from the public in the form of the people who vote with their feet.
Why doesn't it receive the same level of respect? That's a two headed question. As an Australian Osteopath it could be said that osteopaths don't receive the same level as respect here as their US counterparts do, particularly when dealing with the occasional anal, elitist, attitude wearing medical practitioners. However most, if not all Osteopathic practitioners went into the profession knowing they were not considered equals to medical practitioners, along with the benefits of being expertly trained to master OMT. Australian, New Zealand and British Osteopaths use OMT 100% of the time and possess the diagnostic skills for when NOT to use it (equally as important as being good at the techniques themselves) and will refer accordingly if other modes of treatment are necessary. It could be said that while US Osteos have a higher level of 'respect' due to their eual footholding with MD's, most (from what we hear down under) Osteopaths choose not to practice OMT. Why is it that they choose not to use the element that distinguishes them if they are so well respected for it? What then, if they choose not to practice OMT, differentiates a US trained DO from a traditional allopathic school other than the lower entry scores and apparently easier admission to osteopathic schools? That element certainly seems to separate the Osteos from the medics in the eyes of non-US osteopaths, though I have to admit being envious at times of your increased rights in practice. As for us osteos without full practice rights we are struggling to publicly distinguish ourselves from Chiropractors and Physiotherapists.
So in answer to your question, it seems 'respect' in your eyes comes from acceptance by the wider medical community by being an equivalent qualification to an MD.
That is purely an issue of medical politics and the Australian Medical Association will NEVER allow anyone to hold an equivalent qualification to them. Consider yourselves fortunate that the US Osteos had the numbers to be able to receive increased practice rights when they did which is a luxury other nations will unlikely be afforded.
There is only one form of respect that matters - that which comes from the public in the form of the people who vote with their feet.
Post a Comment