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.
Hi (ok to say "thatfootsite" on this forum by the way).
Pro's are as you say.
Cons are as outlined by Alex Catto in the "How do practitioners calculate their fees" thread.
Unless contracts are national (and watertight) you could end up with a chunk of your practice income being taken away with little or no notice.
You're right to be excited though. My opinion is that this is the future of podiatry in the UK - done properly :) .
The fact is, there are more pod patients in the UK than there are pods to deal with them. Mark Russell is very knowledgeable in this area, and he feels that to go forward with this, contracts and conditions of work would need to be sewn up at govt/DOH level.
Thereafter the patients would be free to choose who they want to go to.
Its a win-win situation :) PROVIDED contracts are watertight.
Locally-arranged contracts are of little use. They generally mean that patients can be withdrawn at a few weeks notice, and of course this is no good to anyone, either patient or podiatrist.
A few of us feel that we need to be pro-active in this area, not simply sit and "wait and see". Its worth looking at Mark's thread on Scottish Parliament and petitioning, and if you felt it worthwhile you may like to sign?
Scuse me guys but doesn't the present health and social care bill, local funding structures from clinical/GP commissioning and 'any qualified provider' tendering fit the bill for an "all sewn up at govt/DOH level" condition.
Descartes seems to consider here that beliefs formed by pure reasoning are less doubtful than those formed through perception.
Last edited by David Smith : 4th September 2012 at 10:04 AM.
By the time the present government's bill on health and social care comes to fruition I doubt very much they will be able to afford the paper to print the detail on, never mind funding it properly. Chances are there will be no podiatry provision in state funded care - it is not regarded as a core essential service - and is way down the line of priorities. There may be "approved" providers - but the cost will be borne by the patient, not the NHS. That said, I see Jeremy Runt has been promoted to Health Secretary in today's idiots reshuffle - so we might see homeopathic podiatrists gaining consultant status in the very near future. But not surgeons - sorry surgical podiatrists....