Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums, for communication between foot health professionals about podiatry and related topics.
You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members (PM), upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, earn CPD points and access many other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisments in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
As a result of a telephone call from Yell, I have received a letter this morning informing me that when the time comes for this years advert. in Yell I will have three choices,
1. Stay as a Registered Chiropodist in the Chiropodist/Podiatrist Section?
2. Transfer my advert. to the new FOOT HEALTH SECTION of this years new Yellow Pages?
3. Advertise in both! (Now there we have a new one I think!)?
"Have you made this decision recently and which way did you go ref. the three choices above?"
P.S. I note that one reasonably large well established State Registered Group Practice in my area has already converted from Chiropody to Foot Health above their surgery door? Is this the sign of things to come, the latest in Society practice or just a one off coincidence???
We too have received this advance notification asking us to consider being found under F.... for foot health! (you can imagine..) We had originally asked to be put under P for podiatry but that was not feasible.
Anyway we have written to the HPC to complain as we see it as a blatant attempt to duck out of the new legislation that comes into full force july 8th midnight 2005.
They have responded to say they are aware of this development and are in talks with yellow pages setting out the new law of the land.
The Articles are clear,(section 13) it is the practice of the profession not just the title use that comes under jurisdiction by the HPC.
My understanding is that if you call yourself a duck but offer professional services in one of the 12 professions then that will be an offence. ie duck services offering chiropody/podiatry under the title "duck" will still be against the Order.
Ducking out for now!
Thought this one had died. Although as you may have gathered from some of my posts I am from that Sector where some of us always thought there should be a division in the Register, (Never mind the Yellow Pages!), Sections,
3. Foot Health Technicians. (FHT.).
It had crossed my mind that there could be a place for "P.", and you're people have reasoned their way to that conclusion too, it seems. Obviously even if it puts you at the back of Yell. I can see your point. You are complete in your training and practise aren't you! People would quickly learn to look for you wouldn't they!
In the case of the traditional Chiropodist, not much to say or add at this time!
In the case of the FHT's., still a question mark until after the 8th.July2005?
PS. - Section 13 - Emma have you got the name of the Act identifying it. Article 13 in the Order does not really ring true regarding that which HPC.'s. expressed intention in your posting says, (Unless I have left out My Lord the Judge of course?). Hope you can enlighten me on that one? I do not need convincing of their intentions of course, a forgone conclusion, expensively messy though??? But after all it's Friday isn't it!
Isnt it calling yourself a Pod/Chirop or "holding oneself out to be" to be a Pod/Chirop illegal not the actual act or practice of "foot care at any level".
So having a foothealth section and claiming to be an individual to treat foot pathology in a chiropodial manner ie "I can tx your callous with a scalpel/deal with your ingrowing nail" but not actually referring to it as chiropody is legal.
If YP have a "link" from Ch/Pod to FH section that could be illegal because its saying they are the same ie FH's holding out to be Ch/Pod's. It is a grey area but clearly circumvents the purpose of legislation whatever your opinion of the legislation.
Sneaky it is now! My reference related to the time when the Order was without the Queen's signature. Now water under the bridge but it could have been very different if certain things and occupations had been clearly defined in Act of Parliament like Doctors, Dentists and a whole swathe of others!
I think wait and see what the HPC. do after the 8th of July, after all they are now in charge!!!
FHP.'s I'm glad I haven't got to work that one out? Isn't it strange that no move has been made against them, however, in fact they are on course for Registration beside us, not below us.
Colin. (Tin-hat time I fear?!?).
PS. Lawrence, I have also always taken the new Law to defend 'The Protected Titles, not the various parallel variants of practise touching on 'The Protected Titles.'
Last edited by C Bain : 24th June 2005 at 06:12 AM.
Reason: Must not insult the Queen with bad spelling!