Showing posts with label profession. Show all posts
Showing posts with label profession. Show all posts

Saturday, March 15, 2014

Arizona Equine Massage Therapist Fights Accusation of Illegal Practice of Veterinary Medicine with Lawsuit


There are 50 states in the USA but Arizona seems to make the news more often than most. And when it does, it is usually because there is something that lawmakers in Arizona want to keep out. Whether it's unique Arizona-only laws to send illegal immigrants back to Mexico or the rights of businesses to refuse to serve gays on religious grounds, Arizona makes the news when it makes new laws.

Now it wants to get rid of equine massage therapists.

Friday, February 10, 2012

AVMA: Horseshoeing Is No Longer an Excluded Profession in the New Model Veterinary Practice Act (But Farriery Is)

confusion

What's in a name?

The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Executive Board approved revisions to the new 2011 Model Veterinary Practice Act (MVPA) in November 2011, and those changes became official on January 7, 2012 when the AVMA's governing body, the House of Delegates, approved the document.

The Model Veterinary Practice Act is just that: an approved sample ("model") document that is promoted by the AVMA as reflecting the verbiage  and policies it would like to see adopted in each of the 50 states as the ideal state veterinary practice act.

That said, each state can and probably will make some changes; the states usually end up with documents that vary on some level related to how veterinary practice is conducted or regulated.

Each time the MVPA is changed, the AVMA opens a comment period for members and the public to have their say. That period has now passed.

The AVMA reported that it received "985 comments on individual sections of the model act.  About 70% of the comments were submitted by non-members, and 10% came from organizations as opposed to individuals.  The sections attracting the most comments are Section 2 (definitions, especially “complementary, alternative and integrative therapies” and “practice of veterinary medicine”), Section 6  (exemptions to the act), the preamble (general comments) and Section 3 (board of veterinary medicine)."

While horseshoeing had been previously excluded from practicing veterinary medicine, this year's edits (Section 6. Number 8) showed a line drawn through the word "horseshoeing". It was changed to "farriery".

The old document read

The document-in-progress showed the change:


The exemption now reads "Any person lawfully engaged in the art or profession of farriery."

No explanation is given for the change, and while other words are defined, "farriery" is not.

Although other professions, such as pharmacists and researchers, are also listed as exempt, farriers are one of only a few professions predicated by "lawfully engaged". And it is the only one described as an "art or profession".

Since farriery and other hoof-related professions are not regulated in the United States except on racetracks, the language begs the question of how it would be determined whether or not an individual was lawfully engaged in providing farriery care to an animal.

And what, exactly, farriery is.

The word change in the horseshoeing--or farriery--section is probably a minor matter in the big picture of things, but it should be duly noted. "Horseshoeing" is the word traditionally used in all US government documents; farriery is seldom mentioned. The word seems to have been dusted off, perhaps around the time of the formation of the American Farrier's Association and it has enjoyed a renaissance, particularly in the past 30 years or so.

That said, it remains poorly defined and some hoof-oriented professionals simply don't like the word, while others prefer it. You can call yourself whatever you please--except a veterinarian, unless you are one.

The general public, however, is behind the curve; people are usually convinced that a farrier either makes fur coats or carries people back and forth across rivers in a boat. They think "farrier" is a great word for "Words with Friends" on their iPhones.

Repeated calls and emails to the AVMA and its task force administrators were not acknowledged or returned except for one interchange with a media relations representative who referred me to the librarian. I did enjoy my conversation with Diane Fagen, AVMA librarian, who set out to find out if a farrier was defined anywhere by the association.

Being a good librarian, she cheerfully suggested we look up farrier in the ultimate reference, the Oxford English Dictionary. I warned her not to, and that attorneys roll their eyes at OED definitions, but she did anyway.

"Oh my," Ms Fagen murmured, reading aloud a lengthy definition of the term "farrier" that seems woefully outdated, though historically accurate. "It means horse doctor," she concluded.

"I can see why you called," she acknowledged. But no, she didn't have any information on why the word had been changed.

But that's how change happens, sometimes: it just does.


© Fran Jurga and Hoofcare Publishing; Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog is a between-issues news service for subscribers to Hoofcare and Lameness Journal. Please, no use without permission. You only need to ask. This blog may be read online at the blog page, checked via RSS feed, or received via a digest-type email (requires signup in box at top right of blog page). To subscribe to Hoofcare and Lameness (the journal), please visit the main site, www.hoofcare.com, where many educational products and media related to equine lameness and hoof science can be found. Questions or problems with this blog? Send email to blog@hoofcare.com.  
Follow Hoofcare + Lameness on Twitter: @HoofcareJournal
Read this blog's headlines in your Facebook news feed when you "like" the Hoofcare + Lameness Facebook Page
 
Disclosure of Material Connection: I have not received any direct compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the brands, products, or services that I have mentioned, other than Hoofcare Publishing. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.

Monday, March 14, 2011

Arkansas Veterinary Practice Act Definitions Sought for Guiding Exclusion of Farriers, Tooth Floaters, Other Professions

This video requires Silverlight, a Microsoft video interface. 

Before you click "play" on the video, please take a minute to read this text so you will know what you are watching.

It's time for the politics of horsecare again. Or is it the politics of veterinary care?

We're back in Little Rock, Arkansas, and here are the gentlemen of the House Agriculture, Forestry & Natural Resources Permanent Subcommittee of Agriculture. They need to review all bills under their jurisdiction before they are presented to the legislature. We met them before, in late January, when they heard testimony on House Bill 1099 (video of that hearing is also posted). H.B. 1099 would have exempted a long list of animal care professionals from the all-encompassing but loosely defined description of veterinary medicine in the Arkansas Veterinary Practice Act. That bill was not voted forward by the committee.

So Representative Gary Smith came back again on March 9, with House Bill 1712. This bill was much more specific and only dealt with horsecare. In particular, 1712 would have exempted massage therapy, tooth floating, and farriery and hoofcare, although it would have created a state certification program for equine dental technicians.

The video you'll see in this video begins as the hearing for House Bill 1712. It, however, morphed into a presentation of a second bill; likewise, farriery and hoofcare morphed into "the lawful practice of horseshoeing". There is considerable discussion of what the lawful (or unlawful) practice of horseshoeing might be.

This is a very long discussion, but probably worth your time to have a listen. The second bill, known as House Bill 1763, was received more favorably and seems to be a compromise favored by the state veterinary board. Please note, however, that HB1763 is marked by the state government as "re-referred to committee" on the official state web site rather than approved. Reports in the press indicate that the bill was approved. This is a discrepancy.

For those who don't want to go through the video, the second bill went through an amendment process, in part to clarify the description of horseshoeing. The bill was amended to read: Arkansas Code § 17-101-307(b), concerning the practices that are excluded from the practice of veterinary medicine, is amended to read as follows: (b) This chapter shall not be construed to prohibit: (8) Any person: (A) Engaging in the art or profession of horseshoeing.

The meeting to amend HB 1763 was not videotaped, or the video is not available to the public.

If HB 1763 passes the legislature, it does not exempt massage therapy and tooth floating indefinitely; it only gives them a two-year moratorium from cease-and-desist orders from the veterinary board. After two years, some other bill should be waiting in the wings to take over, or these horse professionals may not be able to work in Arkansas.

Hopefully other states can learn from what is going on in these midwest states (Oklahoma and Texas are two other states with recent legislation) as they struggle with the interpretation of what veterinary medicine is, and isn't. According to the existing law in many states, veterinary medicine pretty much encompasses all care of animals. The time to have exempted professions was back when the draft veterinary practice act was introduced, but no one's ears were up then, or else no one ever thought that cease-and-desist letters would be sent out.

It seems pretty obvious that efforts to combine large and small animals or even cattle and horses, or to combine different professions makes it difficult for legislators and for people from agencies and businesses who would testify. It may be that it's every profession for itself. Arkansas has proven that quite clearly.

Another thing that seems obvious is that the legislators are looking for highly credible testimonies on these subjects. There's no question that they don't know much about the flow of services, or what happens when a horseowner needs some work done on a horse.  Before this legislation came up, they probably never gave it a thought beyond the fact that they knew that veterinarians make barn calls. They're getting an education and they're learning that the horse industry in their state employs a lot of people on a lot of levels. And it takes a support crew of professionals of many descriptions to keep a stable of horses adequately prepared for showing, racing or even just recreational riding.

No one who is elected by public votes wants to put people out of work, yet the state government is in the business of enforcing the laws and legislation it has on its books. These legislators have to stand behind their government's previous actions. Change may be necessary, but it may also be incremental...and painstakingly slow.

If I lived in Arkansas and was working in any of these professions, I think I would slow the process down even further and ask for more amendment to HB 1763 by defining each of the professions the way that tooth floating is defined. If someone has a natural hoofcare practice and does not engage in horseshoeing per se, is he or she not exempt? Must a shoe be on the horse for this law to stick? Now's the time to find that out, not when a cease-and-desist letter arrives in the mail. And to get it printed in the bill, not in a verbal assurance.

Maybe you're one of the people affected by legislative rumblings in Arkansas or other states. Maybe you're hoping this will just go away. Be careful what your wish is: it will be back, if people care about preserving your profession. If no one cares, your profession may be lost in a legislative or legal shuffle one day, and your livelihood along with it.

 © Fran Jurga and Hoofcare Publishing; Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog is a between-issues news service for subscribers to Hoofcare and Lameness Journal. Please, no use without permission. You only need to ask. This blog may be read online at the blog page, checked via RSS feed, or received via a digest-type email (requires signup in box at top right of blog page). To subscribe to Hoofcare and Lameness (the journal), please visit the main site, www.hoofcare.com, where many educational products and media related to equine lameness and hoof science can be found. Questions or problems with this blog? Send email to blog@hoofcare.com.
 
Follow the Hoof Blog on Twitter: @HoofcareJournal
Join the Hoofcare + Lameness Facebook Page
 
Disclosure of Material Connection: I have not received any direct compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the brands, products, or services that I have mentioned, other than Hoofcare Publishing. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.