- Email: [email protected]
Thorsons Introductory Guide to Osteopathy
acupuncture and traditional Chinese medicine although the author seems to be a little less objective when describing a treatment session. A useful aspect of the book is the list of contacts given at the end of each section; addresses in the UK have been included. It is, however, a pity that the American author obviously had no idea h o w many of these 'alternative' ideas are already incorporated, at no extra charge, into mainstream physiotherapy - truly the safest orthodox alternative! This is an interesting book, aimed at the general public, and it should be read by physiotherapists i f only in order to answer the constant questions asked about other therapies experienced by patients and their families. VAL HOPWOOD GradDipPhys MCSP
Thorsons Introductory Guide t o Osteopathy, by Edward Triancedo, Thorsons, London, 1991 (ISBN 0 7 2 2 5 2 5 3 2 x). IIIUS. 126 pages. f 3.99. This book has been written for the patient osteopathic treamtentand though t h e chapter dealing w i t h t h e background and thinking behind osteopathy will be of interestto patients 1 feel that the of the book is at the trained sector, Certainly the book should answer a lot of questions pt,ysiotherapists and doctors may generally want to ask, personally I feel the book is well written read and should be viewed and by other osteopaths to to remind us all of the aims behind treatment. Apart from informing doctors and patients
about the benefits of treatment the book also emphasises t h e i m p o r t a n c e of rethinking and planning treatment for each patient to avoid the mechanical reaction that one condition has only one type of treatment. The booklet does outline points to look for and I am happy to see that it does not claim to have all the answers. I am all in favour of spreading the word that osteopathy is not just a few sharp manipulations though I must say that claiming to0 many benefits by treating internal problems may give osteopathy a mystical feel and the whole concept could easily be misunderstood. In short - a very good outline of the thinking and aim behind osteopathic treatment. KAREN TELLING MCSP DO
View Across the Educational Gulf otherwise indeed other) functions what was the basis of his jcb as director of human resources? - but Mr Vickerman was perhaps being deliberately provocative. His statements t h a t Regional selfsufficiency was 'sensible and straightforward' and that a significant proportion of post-basic training existed for reasons of 'professional comfort' could hardly be interpreted in any other way, and the latter remark caused particular offence among the audience. To his credit, though, Mr Vickerman expressed concern that Working Paper 10 could lead t o the closure of schools, and felt it must be possible for Regions to avoid this eventuality. He gave no indication, however, of h o w this might be achieved. The scale of problems associated w i t h Working Paper 10, including that of school closures, was illustrated by a series of short deliveries from the chairmen of the CPSM's professional Boards. In particular, it was pointed out that only one-third of chiropodists were employed within the NHS, which nevertheless controlled chiropody training under the Working Paper 10, while the mismatch between Regional funding and the geographical disposition of occupational therapy schools was bound to lead to the closure of existing provision. The need for three Cs - co-operation, consultation, and communication - was suggested by one of the professional chairmen, and this motto was eagerly taken up by Stephen Dorrell MP, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health, w h o then addressed the conference. Mr Dorrell explained that the policy behind Working Paper 10 was that money spent on training (this word was universally substituted for 'education') stood less risk of waste if the training itself was 'employer-led'. He did not deny the role of validating authorities in ensuring professional standards, but felt employer and professional perspectives should be balanced. Interestingly, M r Dorrell offered a new interpretation of 'Regional self-sufficiency' by stating that it was the responsibility of a Region to meet its o w n training needs, but these would not necessarily be met ~
THE timing and purpose of the conference on Working Paper 10, convened by the Council for Professions Supplementary to Medicine on October 15, were in some ways puzzling. It is now t w o years since Working Paper 10, outlining the changes in health care education arising from the Health Service Review, was published. The health care professions concerned, including the CSP, have been drawing attention to its failings ever since. Yet Professor Kennerley, chairman of t h e CPSM, opened the conference by implying not only that the Council represented the major voice of the professions in this matter, but that the audience had been invited mainly 'to allow us t o move forward as a Council, but drawing on your expertise'. Given that the conference was the first entry of the CPSM into public debate on Working Paper 10, this presumption seemed ironic. Nevertheless, the conference which followed did allow a thorough airing of the issues connected w i t h the implementation of Working Paper 10. The reforms found a vigorous champion in Ian Vickerman, director of human resources for the Northern Region Health Authority, and a member of the CPSM's Council. In a spirited defence of Working Paper 10, he set out the advantages of identifying full costs of training, relating investment to need, arriving at Regional self-sufficiency, and demonstrating greater sensitivity to change. Unfortunately, these advantages were lost in a high-speed delivery that underlined the feeling that M r Vickerman was talking at, rather than to, the health care professions. These professions, a c c o r d i n g t o Mt Vickerman, had 'put up psychological barriers to the reforms', and it was important to remember that 'the NHS does not exist to employ staff but t o provide quality health care'. A more balanced viewpoint might suggest that the NHS existed in terms of both (and
within the Region itself. Unfortunately, this message is not getting through to the Regions, and Mr Dorrell'S assertion (given in the double negative) that Working Paper 10 'did not mean there was no national interest in planning' failed to convince the audience. Two further speakers followed in the afternoon: Professor Judith Hitchen, dean of the Health and Social Sciences Faculty at Birmingham Polytechnic, and Dr Ken Beaumont, training co-ordinator for Trent Regional Health Authority. Professor Hitchen outlined changes in quality assurance methods in higher education - of whiq'ri Working Paper 10 was but one.example while Dr Beaumont outlined how his Region had undertaken the contracting process w i t h educational providers. The t w o speakers demonstrated h o w far apart are the perspectives of 'purchaser' and 'provider' in health care education. Dr Beaumont related how a Regional Education and Training Council had been set up to oversee t h e p r o c e s s of e d u c a t i o n a l contracting, but added that educational providers within the Region had been excluded owing to their 'conflict of interest'. It was not certain whether Dr Beaumont felt the Regional managers were similarly compromised. Professor Hitchen, in by far the best contribution to the conference, indicated that the separating of funding for health care education from the remainder of HE would cause both short and long-term problems, particularly in the funding of research, scholarship, and capital building costs. It was questionable whether some HE institutions would wish to continue being educational providers on the terms set out by Working Paper 10. While the need for the three Cs was duly acknowledged at the conference, the evident gulf between managers and educators seemed wider at the end of the conference than it had at the beginning. Until these t w o perspectives are brought closer together and this does mean abandoning the rhetoric behind Working Paper 10 -- it is difficult t o see h o w these particular reforms can be made to work. ~
846
Phys/otherapy, December 1991, vol 77, no 72
Thorsons Introductory Guide t o Osteopathy, by Edward Triancedo, Thorsons, London, 1991 (ISBN 0 7 2 2 5 2 5 3 2 x). IIIUS. 126 pages. f 3.99. This book has been written for the patient osteopathic treamtentand though t h e chapter dealing w i t h t h e background and thinking behind osteopathy will be of interestto patients 1 feel that the of the book is at the trained sector, Certainly the book should answer a lot of questions pt,ysiotherapists and doctors may generally want to ask, personally I feel the book is well written read and should be viewed and by other osteopaths to to remind us all of the aims behind treatment. Apart from informing doctors and patients
about the benefits of treatment the book also emphasises t h e i m p o r t a n c e of rethinking and planning treatment for each patient to avoid the mechanical reaction that one condition has only one type of treatment. The booklet does outline points to look for and I am happy to see that it does not claim to have all the answers. I am all in favour of spreading the word that osteopathy is not just a few sharp manipulations though I must say that claiming to0 many benefits by treating internal problems may give osteopathy a mystical feel and the whole concept could easily be misunderstood. In short - a very good outline of the thinking and aim behind osteopathic treatment. KAREN TELLING MCSP DO
View Across the Educational Gulf otherwise indeed other) functions what was the basis of his jcb as director of human resources? - but Mr Vickerman was perhaps being deliberately provocative. His statements t h a t Regional selfsufficiency was 'sensible and straightforward' and that a significant proportion of post-basic training existed for reasons of 'professional comfort' could hardly be interpreted in any other way, and the latter remark caused particular offence among the audience. To his credit, though, Mr Vickerman expressed concern that Working Paper 10 could lead t o the closure of schools, and felt it must be possible for Regions to avoid this eventuality. He gave no indication, however, of h o w this might be achieved. The scale of problems associated w i t h Working Paper 10, including that of school closures, was illustrated by a series of short deliveries from the chairmen of the CPSM's professional Boards. In particular, it was pointed out that only one-third of chiropodists were employed within the NHS, which nevertheless controlled chiropody training under the Working Paper 10, while the mismatch between Regional funding and the geographical disposition of occupational therapy schools was bound to lead to the closure of existing provision. The need for three Cs - co-operation, consultation, and communication - was suggested by one of the professional chairmen, and this motto was eagerly taken up by Stephen Dorrell MP, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health, w h o then addressed the conference. Mr Dorrell explained that the policy behind Working Paper 10 was that money spent on training (this word was universally substituted for 'education') stood less risk of waste if the training itself was 'employer-led'. He did not deny the role of validating authorities in ensuring professional standards, but felt employer and professional perspectives should be balanced. Interestingly, M r Dorrell offered a new interpretation of 'Regional self-sufficiency' by stating that it was the responsibility of a Region to meet its o w n training needs, but these would not necessarily be met ~
THE timing and purpose of the conference on Working Paper 10, convened by the Council for Professions Supplementary to Medicine on October 15, were in some ways puzzling. It is now t w o years since Working Paper 10, outlining the changes in health care education arising from the Health Service Review, was published. The health care professions concerned, including the CSP, have been drawing attention to its failings ever since. Yet Professor Kennerley, chairman of t h e CPSM, opened the conference by implying not only that the Council represented the major voice of the professions in this matter, but that the audience had been invited mainly 'to allow us t o move forward as a Council, but drawing on your expertise'. Given that the conference was the first entry of the CPSM into public debate on Working Paper 10, this presumption seemed ironic. Nevertheless, the conference which followed did allow a thorough airing of the issues connected w i t h the implementation of Working Paper 10. The reforms found a vigorous champion in Ian Vickerman, director of human resources for the Northern Region Health Authority, and a member of the CPSM's Council. In a spirited defence of Working Paper 10, he set out the advantages of identifying full costs of training, relating investment to need, arriving at Regional self-sufficiency, and demonstrating greater sensitivity to change. Unfortunately, these advantages were lost in a high-speed delivery that underlined the feeling that M r Vickerman was talking at, rather than to, the health care professions. These professions, a c c o r d i n g t o Mt Vickerman, had 'put up psychological barriers to the reforms', and it was important to remember that 'the NHS does not exist to employ staff but t o provide quality health care'. A more balanced viewpoint might suggest that the NHS existed in terms of both (and
within the Region itself. Unfortunately, this message is not getting through to the Regions, and Mr Dorrell'S assertion (given in the double negative) that Working Paper 10 'did not mean there was no national interest in planning' failed to convince the audience. Two further speakers followed in the afternoon: Professor Judith Hitchen, dean of the Health and Social Sciences Faculty at Birmingham Polytechnic, and Dr Ken Beaumont, training co-ordinator for Trent Regional Health Authority. Professor Hitchen outlined changes in quality assurance methods in higher education - of whiq'ri Working Paper 10 was but one.example while Dr Beaumont outlined how his Region had undertaken the contracting process w i t h educational providers. The t w o speakers demonstrated h o w far apart are the perspectives of 'purchaser' and 'provider' in health care education. Dr Beaumont related how a Regional Education and Training Council had been set up to oversee t h e p r o c e s s of e d u c a t i o n a l contracting, but added that educational providers within the Region had been excluded owing to their 'conflict of interest'. It was not certain whether Dr Beaumont felt the Regional managers were similarly compromised. Professor Hitchen, in by far the best contribution to the conference, indicated that the separating of funding for health care education from the remainder of HE would cause both short and long-term problems, particularly in the funding of research, scholarship, and capital building costs. It was questionable whether some HE institutions would wish to continue being educational providers on the terms set out by Working Paper 10. While the need for the three Cs was duly acknowledged at the conference, the evident gulf between managers and educators seemed wider at the end of the conference than it had at the beginning. Until these t w o perspectives are brought closer together and this does mean abandoning the rhetoric behind Working Paper 10 -- it is difficult t o see h o w these particular reforms can be made to work. ~
846
Phys/otherapy, December 1991, vol 77, no 72