I look forward to any movement that shines a light upon restrictive practise, cover ups or simply illogical policy.
To be clear, the APA has an official policy that states it is against preferred provider schemes. The APA also states that Government policy precludes it from directing members against certain practises as this would classify as restrictive trade practise in its own right. What is happening is a psuedo acceptance of the problem via supporting some super physio's against the small practice. Superficially the APA provides encouragement to all therapists to do well however the reality is different. The majority of APA policy makers are professional students with lots of letters after their names, cutting out the coal face experienced workers in favour of guru's. These professional students continue to work toward policy changes involving the physio registration board to begin systematic accreditation requirements and ethic changes that further hamstring our ability to treat without complete compliance to some rediculous evidence based info that often throws out the baby with the bath water via highly restrictive Pedro or Cochrane protocols.
The new students coming through are doing so after their course structures are structured for research by the powers that be and the above evidence base restrictions that do not allow for change or innovation are taught. These students are designed to be academics rather than clinicians and do not know any better after graduation, employment in super franchises clinics seems the cool thing to do for kudos in thge profession, thus perpetuating the changes and long term demise of our profession.
These students are unlikely to side with the coal face dinosaurs as we do not fit the bill for knowing anything due to a lack of letters and professional student / guru status.
The only way to break the pattern is to go to the power brokers that have control - that is the politicians that listen to votes and arguments for money saving methods. Politicians listen to these arguments when the lobby also means votes. These days, adding all the above to an embarrassing issue that gains public support results in change whereas logic comes a distant last in the race.
The media, once on board to increase their own credibility / sales is the weapon. The main problem is that control of the argument in the public eye can be lost by those attempting the changes and momentum is lost or worse the cause is damaged.
It would be paramount to ensure continued management of the issues before the public by co-ordinated sustained release of the embarrassments. Look to the celebrity pages where some of these people are always in the news - lessons to be learnt.
That is my version of a rant!