Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
ESA medical assessment
66 views
Skip to first unread message
JohnDavidson
Nov 26, 2014, 8:40:35 PM11/26/14
to
I understand that a medical practitioner must, by law, be registered with
the Health and Care Professions Council. Does this extend to assessors who
are employed by the DWP to perform medical assessments for the purposes of
ESA?
TIA
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
the Health and Care Professions Council. Does this extend to assessors who
are employed by the DWP to perform medical assessments for the purposes of
ESA?
TIA
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
Percy Picacity
Nov 27, 2014, 4:34:09 AM11/27/14
to
On 2014-11-27 00:32:54 +0000, JohnDavidson said:
> I understand that a medical practitioner must, by law, be registered
> with the Health and Care Professions Council. Does this extend to
> assessors who are employed by the DWP to perform medical assessments
> for the purposes of ESA?
>
> TIA
I don't see why they would need to be, provided they don't mislead
> I understand that a medical practitioner must, by law, be registered
> with the Health and Care Professions Council. Does this extend to
> assessors who are employed by the DWP to perform medical assessments
> for the purposes of ESA?
>
> TIA
anyone about their professional status, or use a protected title. BTW,
although nurses like to call themselves 'medical' something, 'medical
practitioner' should refer to doctors, who are registered with the
General Medical Council rather than the organisation you mention.
--
Percy Picacity
JohnDavidson
Nov 27, 2014, 9:59:28 AM11/27/14
to
I understand that a medical practitioner must, by law, be registered with
the Health and Care Professions Council. Does this extend to assessors who
are employed by the DWP to perform medical assessments for the purposes of
ESA?
TIA
----------------
the Health and Care Professions Council. Does this extend to assessors who
are employed by the DWP to perform medical assessments for the purposes of
ESA?
TIA
Just as a follow-up, I took this from the HCPC website:
"Anyone using one of these titles must be registered with the Health and
Care Professions Council, or they may be subject to prosecution and a fine
of up to £5,000 ... A person commits an offence if, with intent to deceive,
they use a protected title and are not registered with us." The page then
lists a number of titles, including Physiotherapist.
Now, what action is appropriate if a DWP assessment is conducted by someone
who introduces themselves as a Registered Physiotherapist and signs the
assessment with the same title, but is not registered with the HCPC (or
indeed the Chartered Institute of Physiotherapists)?
R. Mark Clayton
Nov 27, 2014, 9:59:58 AM11/27/14
to
"JohnDavidson" <JohnDa...@google.blah> wrote in message
news:CMSdnUcyjdKp7OvJ...@brightview.co.uk...
>I understand that a medical practitioner must, by law, be registered with
>the Health and Care Professions Council. Does this extend to assessors who
>are employed by the DWP to perform medical assessments for the purposes of
>ESA?
They are not treating patients, merely assessing claimants.
>the Health and Care Professions Council. Does this extend to assessors who
>are employed by the DWP to perform medical assessments for the purposes of
>ESA?
OTOH the assessments will often require the assessor to touch the claimant
etc. for which medical qualification and registration is probably required.
Percy Picacity
Nov 27, 2014, 10:27:50 AM11/27/14
to
On 2014-11-27 13:53:03 +0000, R. Mark Clayton said:
> "JohnDavidson" <JohnDa...@google.blah> wrote in message
> news:CMSdnUcyjdKp7OvJ...@brightview.co.uk...
>> I understand that a medical practitioner must, by law, be registered
>> with the Health and Care Professions Council. Does this extend to
>> assessors who are employed by the DWP to perform medical assessments
>> for the purposes of ESA?
>
> They are not treating patients, merely assessing claimants.
>
> OTOH the assessments will often require the assessor to touch the
> claimant etc. for which medical qualification and registration is
> probably required.
There is no registration required for touching people, or indeed for
> "JohnDavidson" <JohnDa...@google.blah> wrote in message
> news:CMSdnUcyjdKp7OvJ...@brightview.co.uk...
>> I understand that a medical practitioner must, by law, be registered
>> with the Health and Care Professions Council. Does this extend to
>> assessors who are employed by the DWP to perform medical assessments
>> for the purposes of ESA?
>
> They are not treating patients, merely assessing claimants.
>
> OTOH the assessments will often require the assessor to touch the
> claimant etc. for which medical qualification and registration is
> probably required.
treating them. Consider shoe fitters and faith healers for examples of
each. The registration is required for using the protected title, or,
for people pretending to be doctors at least, implying that one has the
relevant qualification. Though the NHS is now full of 'Consultant'
nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists, many
of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many of their
NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are doctors, so even
this is clearly a safe thing to do. However, claiming a protected
title when one is not registered (and, indeed, licensed to practise) is
an offence.
If the OP's Chartered Physiotherapist was not registered with the
Council then indeed they were committing a criminal offence.
--
Percy Picacity
Martin Bonner
Nov 27, 2014, 10:47:07 AM11/27/14
to
Physiotherapist", not a "Chartered Physiotherapist". In this particular
case I think that doesn't change whether an offence has been committed.
However I suspect that the EXACT wording of the claim will be very
important. The OP may have been left with the impression that the
person was a "Registered Physiotherapist", but if the actual claim was
"I do physio assessments, and I'm registered for that" then I don't think
an offence has been committed.
It's like the difference between "I'm an architectural designer" (means
nothing), and "I'm an architect" (an offence if not registered with RIBA).
Many people wouldn't notice the difference.
an architectural designer
RobertL
Nov 27, 2014, 12:41:04 PM11/27/14
to
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:27:50 PM UTC, Percy Picacity wrote:
> Though the NHS is now full of 'Consultant'
> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists, many
> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many of their
> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are doctors, ...
> Though the NHS is now full of 'Consultant'
> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists, many
> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many of their
I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the only possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to mislead people. I
Robert
Message has been deleted
Percy Picacity
Nov 27, 2014, 2:12:40 PM11/27/14
to
--
Percy Picacity
GB
Nov 27, 2014, 2:12:50 PM11/27/14
to
Plus I cannot see why someone with a PhD should not call themselves
doctor. That's the whole point of a PhD. I don't know how you
distinguish toytown degrees.
Robin
Nov 27, 2014, 5:54:11 PM11/27/14
to
> Most dentists now call themselves doctor.
>
Yes. I asked 3 (including one visiting specialist doing my root canal)
>
at my practice last year why. They said one factor was dentists being
fed up that "doctors" were upgraded by airlines more often than they
were.
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid
Percy Picacity
Nov 28, 2014, 3:39:35 AM11/28/14
to
personal care' and do a 'research project' which consists of
interviewing a few patients and writing a dissertation about their
subjective experiences; then, compared with a real PhD, they are
toytown degrees. The standard is often comparable to 'A' level
standard in a non-science subject.
Real PhDs take at least 3 full time years, and several or many
peer-reviewed papers have to be published which are of a quality to
definitely contribute to scientific (or perhaps literary or historical)
knowledge. And the dissertation is the length of a book and is an
up-to-date and internationally recognisable summary of a particular
small field, demonstrating an original contribution.
--
Percy Picacity
Message has been deleted
Roland Perry
Nov 28, 2014, 5:32:54 AM11/28/14
to
In message <ce8a6aa2-7215-47e3...@googlegroups.com>, at
07:45:56 on Thu, 27 Nov 2014, RobertL <rober...@yahoo.com> remarked:
Do you think that surgeons referring to themselves as "Mr" is also
misleading?
--
Roland Perry
07:45:56 on Thu, 27 Nov 2014, RobertL <rober...@yahoo.com> remarked:
>> Though the NHS is now full of 'Consultant'
>> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists, many
>> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many of their
>> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are doctors, ...
>
>I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the only
>possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to mislead people.
That seems a little harsh, especially for clinical psychologists.
>> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists, many
>> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many of their
>> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are doctors, ...
>
>I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the only
>possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to mislead people.
Do you think that surgeons referring to themselves as "Mr" is also
misleading?
--
Roland Perry
GB
Nov 28, 2014, 6:31:59 AM11/28/14
to
proper Ph.D. what I meant was that it is quite difficult to distinguish
that just from a certificate on the office wall. If some institutions
choose to grant degrees for little or no work, it somewhat devalues
these degrees for everybody who has them.
Percy Picacity
Nov 28, 2014, 11:55:10 AM11/28/14
to
On 2014-11-27 20:36:05 +0000, August West said:
> The entity calling itself GB wrote:
>>
>> On 27/11/2014 15:45, RobertL wrote:
>>> On Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:27:50 PM UTC, Percy Picacity wrote:
>>>
>>>> Though the NHS is now full of 'Consultant'
>>>> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists, many
>>>> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many of their
>>>> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are doctors, ...
>>>
>>> I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the only
>>> possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to mislead
>>> people. I
>>
>> Most dentists now call themselves doctor.
>>
>> Plus I cannot see why someone with a PhD should not call themselves
>> doctor. That's the whole point of a PhD. I don't know how you
>> distinguish toytown degrees.
>
> Which PhDs are deserving of the "toytown" label?
99.8% of NHS workers who are not doctors (only a minority of whom do
PhDs or MDs because they are hard work and cost a lot in sacrificed
income and career progression) and are not in academic posts. 50% of
those in academic posts (so you actually need to check their CVs to
find out in the case of non-medical academics).
--
Percy Picacity
> The entity calling itself GB wrote:
>>
>> On 27/11/2014 15:45, RobertL wrote:
>>> On Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:27:50 PM UTC, Percy Picacity wrote:
>>>
>>>> Though the NHS is now full of 'Consultant'
>>>> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists, many
>>>> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many of their
>>>> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are doctors, ...
>>>
>>> I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the only
>>> possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to mislead
>>> people. I
>>
>> Most dentists now call themselves doctor.
>>
>> Plus I cannot see why someone with a PhD should not call themselves
>> doctor. That's the whole point of a PhD. I don't know how you
>> distinguish toytown degrees.
>
99.8% of NHS workers who are not doctors (only a minority of whom do
PhDs or MDs because they are hard work and cost a lot in sacrificed
income and career progression) and are not in academic posts. 50% of
those in academic posts (so you actually need to check their CVs to
find out in the case of non-medical academics).
--
Percy Picacity
Percy Picacity
Nov 28, 2014, 11:55:32 AM11/28/14
to
psychologist, who has no choice in the matter. But when you look at
why a fairly short, fairly basic bit of work-related training for new
graduates, such as most professionals have to do at the beginning of
their career, is called a PhD in the case of clinical psychologists,
you have to wonder what possible motive other than jealousy of doctors'
titles could have been a work in devising the scheme. In most other
fields a PhD is done only by exceptional people who want an academic
career, and involves considerable personal cost.
--
Percy Picacity
Message has been deleted
GB
Nov 28, 2014, 12:41:32 PM11/28/14
to
On 28/11/2014 17:33, August West wrote:
> Really? And who is awarding all these "toytown" PhDs?
>
Have a look at this:
http://www.workexperiencecredits.com/credits/life-experience-degrees/
>
Have a look at this:
http://www.workexperiencecredits.com/credits/life-experience-degrees/
Message has been deleted
R. Mark Clayton
Nov 28, 2014, 1:06:44 PM11/28/14
to
"Percy Picacity" <k...@under.the.invalid> wrote in message
news:8145ef....@news.alt.net...
>
>
>
> --
>
> Percy Picacity
>
Roland Perry
Nov 28, 2014, 1:08:47 PM11/28/14
to
In message <816dus....@news.alt.net>, at 12:05:14 on Fri, 28 Nov
2014, Percy Picacity <k...@under.the.invalid> remarked:
most are done by a wide range of people because they are regarded as a
necessary qualification in the job market. Just as an MSC was fifteen
years ago and a BSC thirty years ago.
Most of the PhDs I know who got their first degree in the 1970's did not
go on to become academics. Today it would be even fewer.
--
Roland Perry
2014, Percy Picacity <k...@under.the.invalid> remarked:
>>>> Though the NHS is now full of 'Consultant'
>>>> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists, many
>>>> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many of their
>>>> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are doctors, ...
>>>
>>> I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the only
>>> possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to mislead people.
>>
>> That seems a little harsh, especially for clinical psychologists.
>>
>> Do you think that surgeons referring to themselves as "Mr" is also misleading?
>
>Well it probably is a little harsh on the individual clinical
>psychologist, who has no choice in the matter. But when you look at
>why a fairly short, fairly basic bit of work-related training for new
>graduates, such as most professionals have to do at the beginning of
>their career, is called a PhD in the case of clinical psychologists,
>you have to wonder what possible motive other than jealousy of doctors'
>titles could have been a work in devising the scheme. In most other
>fields a PhD is done only by exceptional people who want an academic
>career, and involves considerable personal cost.
These days all doctorates involve the considerable personal cost, and
>>>> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists, many
>>>> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many of their
>>>> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are doctors, ...
>>>
>>> I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the only
>>> possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to mislead people.
>>
>> That seems a little harsh, especially for clinical psychologists.
>>
>> Do you think that surgeons referring to themselves as "Mr" is also misleading?
>
>Well it probably is a little harsh on the individual clinical
>psychologist, who has no choice in the matter. But when you look at
>why a fairly short, fairly basic bit of work-related training for new
>graduates, such as most professionals have to do at the beginning of
>their career, is called a PhD in the case of clinical psychologists,
>you have to wonder what possible motive other than jealousy of doctors'
>titles could have been a work in devising the scheme. In most other
>fields a PhD is done only by exceptional people who want an academic
>career, and involves considerable personal cost.
most are done by a wide range of people because they are regarded as a
necessary qualification in the job market. Just as an MSC was fifteen
years ago and a BSC thirty years ago.
Most of the PhDs I know who got their first degree in the 1970's did not
go on to become academics. Today it would be even fewer.
--
Roland Perry
Message has been deleted
GB
Nov 28, 2014, 1:34:40 PM11/28/14
to
On 28/11/2014 17:49, August West wrote:
> Yes, I aware of degree kills, and their worthless products, marketed to
> the esperate, and bought by the gullible. No reputable employer or
> place of learning gives these any weight at all.
I'm perplexed why you asked who is awarding them, then.
>
> So, are you seriously claiming that there are people working in the NHS
> ("99.8% of NHS workers who are not doctors") and UK universities ("50%
> of those in academic posts") who are parading degree mill degrees?
I did not say that. However, I am sure there are plenty of
non-mainstream 'therapists' with phoney degrees like that.
> the esperate, and bought by the gullible. No reputable employer or
> place of learning gives these any weight at all.
I'm perplexed why you asked who is awarding them, then.
>
> So, are you seriously claiming that there are people working in the NHS
> ("99.8% of NHS workers who are not doctors") and UK universities ("50%
> of those in academic posts") who are parading degree mill degrees?
I did not say that. However, I am sure there are plenty of
non-mainstream 'therapists' with phoney degrees like that.
Message has been deleted
Percy Picacity
Nov 28, 2014, 2:26:34 PM11/28/14
to
you use drugs, surgery or manipulation of any kind you need to be
competent to use them and cannot prescribe prescription-only drugs
without a licence. If you use herbs, homeopathy or faith healing or any
other magical therapy you need no competence at all.
You do of course need a veterinary licence to treat animals.
--
Percy Picacity
Percy Picacity
Nov 28, 2014, 2:30:26 PM11/28/14
to
On 2014-11-28 18:18:00 +0000, August West said:
> The entity calling itself Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>> Most of the PhDs I know who got their first degree in the 1970's did
>> not go on to become academics. Today it would be even fewer.
>
> The last figures I saw suggest is's rather less than 20% of (science)
> PhDs that end up in academica.
But does that include all the para-science subjects like nursing and
clinical psychology? If so, it is self-evident as these are not even
vaguely academic degrees.
--
Percy Picacity
> The entity calling itself Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>> Most of the PhDs I know who got their first degree in the 1970's did
>> not go on to become academics. Today it would be even fewer.
>
> PhDs that end up in academica.
But does that include all the para-science subjects like nursing and
clinical psychology? If so, it is self-evident as these are not even
vaguely academic degrees.
--
Percy Picacity
Percy Picacity
Nov 28, 2014, 2:35:29 PM11/28/14
to
On 2014-11-28 17:33:47 +0000, August West said:
And, unfortunately, a few traditional universities which don't want to
left off the gravy train.
--
Percy Picacity
> Really? And who is awarding all these "toytown" PhDs?
The same ex-polytechnics which do first degrees in these subjects.
And, unfortunately, a few traditional universities which don't want to
left off the gravy train.
--
Percy Picacity
Message has been deleted
Percy Picacity
Nov 28, 2014, 3:14:23 PM11/28/14
to
On 2014-11-28 20:04:38 +0000, August West said:
> The entity calling itself Percy Picacity wrote:
>>
> The entity calling itself Percy Picacity wrote:
>>
> subject. And Clinical psychologists genrally have first degrees in
> psychology, specialising in the clinical side at postgraduate level. The
> clinical psychologist I know personally is a graduate of Stirling (Bsc)
> and Liverpool (PhD) universiies, and currently teaches at Munich
> university.
I have no doubt it is possible to do a proper PhD in clinical
psychology. But it is not common.
--
Percy Picacity
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
GB
Nov 28, 2014, 4:10:36 PM11/28/14
to
On 28/11/2014 18:40, August West wrote:
>> However, I am sure there are plenty of non-mainstream 'therapists'
>> with phoney degrees like that.
>
> Oh, yes; they also prety upon the desperate and gullible.
>> However, I am sure there are plenty of non-mainstream 'therapists'
>> with phoney degrees like that.
>
> "Dr" Gillian McKeith is one such.
>
A very dear friend of mine is unfortunately terribly into homoeopathy.
When she insists on dabbing Arnica on a bruise, it's just a harmless
idiosyncrasy. Thankfully, when she got really ill with pneumonia
recently, she eventually saw a proper doctor and got prescribed two
antibiotics which have cured her.
Cured her of the illness, mind you, not of her love of homoeopathy.
"One of the earliest criticisms focuses on McKeith's diploma in
nutrition from American Association of Nutritional Consultants. In 2004,
the same diploma was also awarded, upon application and payment, to Ben
Goldacre's dead cat Henrietta" :))))
Percy Picacity
Nov 28, 2014, 4:14:07 PM11/28/14
to
> Doctorates (not unlike the JD and MD post gradute degrees awarded in the
> USA), like the Doctor of Clinical Psychology offered by various
> institutions. These are postgraduate training courses, and not
> equivalent to PhDs. Although they are at a highet academic level as the
> MBChB degrees medical "doctors" have - which are undergraduate level.
Thanks! I think that is precisely what I am doing. I always assumed
they called them PhDs (and I am fairly sure they actually do in certain
universities) but they are structurally not PhDs. As to being at a
higher academic level, I can only say that an MA in media studies is
also at a "higher academic level" than MBChB, nominally. (And actually
many MBChBs are awarded to postgraduates - but unlike the MD in the US
this is not compulsory, although the content is similar.) The
equivalent medical professional awards are largely run my Royal
Colleges and have no academic equivalent, being more like professional
engineering qualifications.
--
Percy Picacity
Janet
Nov 28, 2014, 4:17:46 PM11/28/14
to
In article <8177q3....@news.alt.net>, k...@under.the.invalid says...
> You don't need any qualification or registration to treat people. If
> you use drugs, surgery or manipulation of any kind you need to be
> competent to use them and cannot prescribe prescription-only drugs
> without a licence. If you use herbs, homeopathy or faith healing or any
> other magical therapy you need no competence at all.
>
Which does not imply that all practitioners of manipulation, herbal or
homeopathic medicine, acupuncture etc are medically unqualified to treat
people. Many of them are fully qualified medical doctors and GP's.
Janet.
> You don't need any qualification or registration to treat people. If
> you use drugs, surgery or manipulation of any kind you need to be
> competent to use them and cannot prescribe prescription-only drugs
> without a licence. If you use herbs, homeopathy or faith healing or any
> other magical therapy you need no competence at all.
>
homeopathic medicine, acupuncture etc are medically unqualified to treat
people. Many of them are fully qualified medical doctors and GP's.
Janet.
GB
Nov 28, 2014, 4:24:50 PM11/28/14
to
On 28/11/2014 21:05, Percy Picacity wrote:
> Thanks! I think that is precisely what I am doing. I always assumed
> they called them PhDs (and I am fairly sure they actually do in certain
> universities) but they are structurally not PhDs. As to being at a
> higher academic level, I can only say that an MA in media studies is
> also at a "higher academic level" than MBChB, nominally. (And actually
> many MBChBs are awarded to postgraduates - but unlike the MD in the US
> this is not compulsory, although the content is similar.) The
> equivalent medical professional awards are largely run my Royal
> Colleges and have no academic equivalent, being more like professional
> engineering qualifications.
>
I have a Masters degree, although I only studied up to Bachelors level.
> Thanks! I think that is precisely what I am doing. I always assumed
> they called them PhDs (and I am fairly sure they actually do in certain
> universities) but they are structurally not PhDs. As to being at a
> higher academic level, I can only say that an MA in media studies is
> also at a "higher academic level" than MBChB, nominally. (And actually
> many MBChBs are awarded to postgraduates - but unlike the MD in the US
> this is not compulsory, although the content is similar.) The
> equivalent medical professional awards are largely run my Royal
> Colleges and have no academic equivalent, being more like professional
> engineering qualifications.
>
It just came through the post a couple of years after I graduated. Very
nice it is, too, especially as I lost the certificate for my Bachelors.
Message has been deleted
Stuart A. Bronstein
Nov 28, 2014, 5:12:45 PM11/28/14
to
August West <aug...@kororaa.com> wrote:
> degrees". They are not post-graduate level degrees, and the
> graduates taking them study alongside undergraduates.
In the US these days, and for the last 30-40 years, more and more law
schools have been giving out JD degrees instead of LLB's. When my
grandmother saw mine, she asked, "what kind of a disease is
jurisprudence?"
--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com
> Percy Picacity wrote:
>>
>> (And actually many MBChBs are awarded to postgraduates
>
> As was my own LLB. These are what's called "second first
>>
>> (And actually many MBChBs are awarded to postgraduates
>
> degrees". They are not post-graduate level degrees, and the
> graduates taking them study alongside undergraduates.
In the US these days, and for the last 30-40 years, more and more law
schools have been giving out JD degrees instead of LLB's. When my
grandmother saw mine, she asked, "what kind of a disease is
jurisprudence?"
--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com
Percy Picacity
Nov 29, 2014, 3:50:15 AM11/29/14
to
could mislead the uninitiated!
--
Percy Picacity
Percy Picacity
Nov 29, 2014, 3:50:38 AM11/29/14
to
particular qualification or authority to offer to examine or treat
people. Though it is certainly best not to mislead people about the
availability of proper treatment elsewhere, especially if the patient
is a child when criminal prosecution could follow. Most alternative
practitioners are sensible enough to encourage the patient (if they
actually have a defined illness) to accept medical treatment too, and
then take the credit for a good outcome!
--
Percy Picacity
David D S
Nov 29, 2014, 3:51:21 AM11/29/14
to
Percy Picacity wrote:
> On 2014-11-27 15:45:56 +0000, RobertL said:
>
> > On Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:27:50 PM UTC, Percy Picacity wrote:
> >
> >
> > Robert
> >
>
> Overweaning self-importance is another possibility.
It is surely the other way round in the truth of the matter (because
few medically qualified "doctors" have any doctorate, though more
do now than in the past), though in popular views, it is usually only
the medically-qualified people who are seen as "doctors". I consider
that the "overweaning self-importance" drives the medically qualified
people as well, given how they wish others to see them. Personally,
although I have had my PhD for many many years, I can recall
only a few times (less than 5) when I or most of my academic colleagues
have ever used the thing.
--
David D S: UK and PR China. (Native BrEng speaker)
Use Reply-To header for email. This email address will be
valid for at least 2 weeks from 2014/11/29 13:23:31
> On 2014-11-27 15:45:56 +0000, RobertL said:
>
> > On Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:27:50 PM UTC, Percy Picacity wrote:
> >
> >> Though the NHS is now full of 'Consultant'
> >> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists,
> many >> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many
> of their >> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are
> >> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists,
> many >> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many
> of their >> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are
> doctors, ...
> >
> > I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the
> > only possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to
> > mislead people. I
> >
> > I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the
> > only possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to
> >
> > Robert
> >
>
> Overweaning self-importance is another possibility.
It is surely the other way round in the truth of the matter (because
few medically qualified "doctors" have any doctorate, though more
do now than in the past), though in popular views, it is usually only
the medically-qualified people who are seen as "doctors". I consider
that the "overweaning self-importance" drives the medically qualified
people as well, given how they wish others to see them. Personally,
although I have had my PhD for many many years, I can recall
only a few times (less than 5) when I or most of my academic colleagues
have ever used the thing.
--
David D S: UK and PR China. (Native BrEng speaker)
Use Reply-To header for email. This email address will be
valid for at least 2 weeks from 2014/11/29 13:23:31
Percy Picacity
Nov 29, 2014, 4:07:34 AM11/29/14
to
some form of supervised clinical work while they do their PhD.
--
Percy Picacity
Percy Picacity
Nov 29, 2014, 5:14:05 AM11/29/14
to
On 2014-11-29 05:27:38 +0000, David D S said:
> Percy Picacity wrote:
>
>> On 2014-11-27 15:45:56 +0000, RobertL said:
>>
>>> On Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:27:50 PM UTC, Percy Picacity wrote:
>>>
>>>> Though the NHS is now full of 'Consultant'
>>>> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists,
>> many >> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many
>> of their >> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are
>> doctors, ...
>>>
>>> I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the
>>> only possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to
>>> mislead people. I
>>>
>>> Robert
>>>
>>
>> Overweaning self-importance is another possibility.
>
> It is surely the other way round in the truth of the matter (because
> few medically qualified "doctors" have any doctorate, though more
> do now than in the past), though in popular views, it is usually only
> the medically-qualified people who are seen as "doctors". I consider
> that the "overweaning self-importance" drives the medically qualified
> people as well, given how they wish others to see them. Personally,
> although I have had my PhD for many many years, I can recall
> only a few times (less than 5) when I or most of my academic colleagues
> have ever used the thing.
The point of course is that 'doctor' has two distinct meanings in this
> Percy Picacity wrote:
>
>> On 2014-11-27 15:45:56 +0000, RobertL said:
>>
>>> On Thursday, November 27, 2014 3:27:50 PM UTC, Percy Picacity wrote:
>>>
>>>> Though the NHS is now full of 'Consultant'
>>>> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists,
>> many >> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many
>> of their >> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are
>> doctors, ...
>>>
>>> I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the
>>> only possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to
>>> mislead people. I
>>>
>>> Robert
>>>
>>
>> Overweaning self-importance is another possibility.
>
> It is surely the other way round in the truth of the matter (because
> few medically qualified "doctors" have any doctorate, though more
> do now than in the past), though in popular views, it is usually only
> the medically-qualified people who are seen as "doctors". I consider
> that the "overweaning self-importance" drives the medically qualified
> people as well, given how they wish others to see them. Personally,
> although I have had my PhD for many many years, I can recall
> only a few times (less than 5) when I or most of my academic colleagues
> have ever used the thing.
country; either someone with a high academic qualification or someone
who is a medical practitioner. There exist people who have both
characteristics , but they are still a definite minority.
It is really only in the case of the NHS that this is confusing, where
some nurse or chiropody etc 'consultants' like to use the title of
'doctor' on their letters and on their clinic door, despite the risk of
misleading patients into thinking they are seeing a medical
practitioner. Whether this matters I don't know. Personally, I would
like to know. I think that 'doctors' are keen for patients to know
they are medical practitioners, rather than being excessively keen on
the title in daily life, but this does vary, I admit.
--
Percy Picacity
Roland Perry
Nov 29, 2014, 5:28:08 AM11/29/14
to
In message <xn0ja45m798ob30...@news.individual.net>, at
05:27:38 on Sat, 29 Nov 2014, David D S <inv...@m-invalid.invalid>
remarked:
art the doctorate was for?
--
Roland Perry
05:27:38 on Sat, 29 Nov 2014, David D S <inv...@m-invalid.invalid>
remarked:
>Personally, although I have had my PhD for many many years, I can
>recall only a few times (less than 5) when I or most of my academic
>colleagues have ever used the thing.
Used the title on a business card, CV or whatever; or practised whatever
>recall only a few times (less than 5) when I or most of my academic
>colleagues have ever used the thing.
art the doctorate was for?
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Nov 29, 2014, 5:49:36 AM11/29/14
to
In message <87mw7bx...@news2.kororaa.com>, at 20:37:14 on Fri, 28
Nov 2014, August West <aug...@kororaa.com> remarked:
a trend towards these schemes being post*doctorate* training courses,
for students currently in the system, anyway.
--
Roland Perry
Nov 2014, August West <aug...@kororaa.com> remarked:
>>> Clinical psychology? As a subset of psychology, is an academic
>>> subject. And Clinical psychologists genrally have first degrees in
>>> psychology, specialising in the clinical side at postgraduate level. The
>>> clinical psychologist I know personally is a graduate of Stirling (Bsc)
>>> and Liverpool (PhD) universiies, and currently teaches at Munich
>>> university.
>>
>> I have no doubt it is possible to do a proper PhD in clinical
>> psychology. But it is not common.
>
>>> subject. And Clinical psychologists genrally have first degrees in
>>> psychology, specialising in the clinical side at postgraduate level. The
>>> clinical psychologist I know personally is a graduate of Stirling (Bsc)
>>> and Liverpool (PhD) universiies, and currently teaches at Munich
>>> university.
>>
>> I have no doubt it is possible to do a proper PhD in clinical
>> psychology. But it is not common.
>
>I think you are confusing PhDs, and the new so-called professional
>Doctorates (not unlike the JD and MD post gradute degrees awarded in the
>USA), like the Doctor of Clinical Psychology offered by various
>institutions. These are postgraduate training courses, and not
>equivalent to PhDs.
As sounds like it might be the case with your friend in Munich, there's
>Doctorates (not unlike the JD and MD post gradute degrees awarded in the
>USA), like the Doctor of Clinical Psychology offered by various
>institutions. These are postgraduate training courses, and not
>equivalent to PhDs.
a trend towards these schemes being post*doctorate* training courses,
for students currently in the system, anyway.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Nov 29, 2014, 6:57:05 AM11/29/14
to
In message <817fa3....@news.alt.net>, at 21:34:26 on Fri, 28 Nov
2014, Percy Picacity <k...@under.the.invalid> remarked:
the degree, because anyone claiming a BA Cantab would be expected to be
in their early 20's.
--
Roland Perry
2014, Percy Picacity <k...@under.the.invalid> remarked:
>> I have a Masters degree, although I only studied up to Bachelors level.
>> It just came through the post a couple of years after I graduated. Very
>> nice it is, too, especially as I lost the certificate for my Bachelors.
>
>Me too - I've never put it on my letters etc. though, as I feel it
>could mislead the uninitiated!
In my case I believe it would be misleading *not* to use the MA form of
>> It just came through the post a couple of years after I graduated. Very
>> nice it is, too, especially as I lost the certificate for my Bachelors.
>
>Me too - I've never put it on my letters etc. though, as I feel it
>could mislead the uninitiated!
the degree, because anyone claiming a BA Cantab would be expected to be
in their early 20's.
--
Roland Perry
polygonum
Nov 29, 2014, 6:58:12 AM11/29/14
to
Dr A BC PhD, MSc, FRSPH, MIHPE
Later on the person states "For absolute clarity – I am not a medical
doctor." - but you do have to read that page and not simply rely on
overall impression.
(This is, possibly, further confused legally by this person being based
not in the UK but very near, though operating both within the UK and on
their chosen island.)
--
Rod
David D S
Nov 29, 2014, 7:26:50 AM11/29/14
to
had one. It's present on my CV in a list of qualifications, which has
been
used one time in conjunction with the degree certificates to
institutions that
required proof of my qualifications. It was never used in any academic
context, except twice, one where the medical journal I and some
colleagues
were publishing material in, insisted on us using titles, and the other
where
the publishers of a book I was an author of required it. I used it in
anger
once to get my mother the care she needed in hospital when she was
dying and receiving inadeqate care.
--
David D S: UK and PR China. (Native BrEng speaker)
Use Reply-To header for email. This email address will be
Rob Morley
Nov 29, 2014, 7:40:55 AM11/29/14
to
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014 21:10:16 +0000
GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> A very dear friend of mine is unfortunately terribly into
> homoeopathy. When she insists on dabbing Arnica on a bruise, it's
> just a harmless idiosyncrasy.
That's not homoeopathy it's herbalism, as is the use of aspirin and
GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> A very dear friend of mine is unfortunately terribly into
> homoeopathy. When she insists on dabbing Arnica on a bruise, it's
> just a harmless idiosyncrasy.
morphine, amongst others. Or did you mean a solution of arnica so
dilute that there's actually nothing left but "energised" water?
Percy Picacity
Nov 29, 2014, 8:33:07 AM11/29/14
to
--
Percy Picacity
Percy Picacity
Nov 29, 2014, 9:45:16 AM11/29/14
to
using both would be tautologous to the point of possibly being
misleading.
--
Percy Picacity
Clive George
Nov 29, 2014, 10:14:52 AM11/29/14
to
don't think anybody would mistake me for somebody in their early 20s,
and on something like a CV I'd have the dates I studied in there.
Janet
Nov 29, 2014, 11:10:41 AM11/29/14
to
In article <81979k....@news.alt.net>, k...@under.the.invalid says...
However, dabbing it on a bruise is not homeopathic usage of arnica.
Janet.
Janet.
Percy Picacity
Nov 29, 2014, 12:10:15 PM11/29/14
to
--
Percy Picacity
RJH
Nov 30, 2014, 4:07:17 AM11/30/14
to
On 28/11/2014 12:05, Percy Picacity wrote:
> On 2014-11-28 09:07:08 +0000, Roland Perry said:
>
>> In message <ce8a6aa2-7215-47e3...@googlegroups.com>, at
>> 07:45:56 on Thu, 27 Nov 2014, RobertL <rober...@yahoo.com> remarked:
medical doctors, I find the whole thing something of a vanity.
In my field (PhD academic in an ex-poly) it has very little currency -
largely because well over half don't have a PhD.
>> That seems a little harsh, especially for clinical psychologists.
>>
>> Do you think that surgeons referring to themselves as "Mr" is also misleading?
>
> Well it probably is a little harsh on the individual clinical
> psychologist, who has no choice in the matter. But when you look at
> why a fairly short, fairly basic bit of work-related training for new
> graduates, such as most professionals have to do at the beginning of
> their career, is called a PhD in the case of clinical psychologists,
> you have to wonder what possible motive other than jealousy of doctors'
> titles could have been a work in devising the scheme. In most other
> fields a PhD is done only by exceptional people who want an academic
> career, and involves considerable personal cost.
>
My understanding is that clinical psychologist needs a 'full' academic
PhD - 3 years full time. In addition to a bunch of other qualifications.
I looked into it briefly a while back - too much like hard work :-)
--
Cheers, Rob
> On 2014-11-28 09:07:08 +0000, Roland Perry said:
>
>> In message <ce8a6aa2-7215-47e3...@googlegroups.com>, at
>> 07:45:56 on Thu, 27 Nov 2014, RobertL <rober...@yahoo.com> remarked:
>>>> Though the NHS is now full of 'Consultant'
>>>> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists, many
>>>> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many of their
>>>> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are doctors, ...
>>>
>>> I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the only
>>> possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to mislead people.
>>
Probably, such as the likes of Gillian McKeith. With the exception of
>>>> nurses and 'Consultant' physios, chiropodists and psychologists, many
>>>> of whom have a toytown PhD and call themselves Doctor. Many of their
>>>> NHS patients are misled daily into thinking they are doctors, ...
>>>
>>> I was not aware of this and find it rather disturbing. Surely the only
>>> possible purpose in describing themselves as "Dr." is to mislead people.
>>
medical doctors, I find the whole thing something of a vanity.
In my field (PhD academic in an ex-poly) it has very little currency -
largely because well over half don't have a PhD.
>> That seems a little harsh, especially for clinical psychologists.
>>
>> Do you think that surgeons referring to themselves as "Mr" is also misleading?
>
> Well it probably is a little harsh on the individual clinical
> psychologist, who has no choice in the matter. But when you look at
> why a fairly short, fairly basic bit of work-related training for new
> graduates, such as most professionals have to do at the beginning of
> their career, is called a PhD in the case of clinical psychologists,
> you have to wonder what possible motive other than jealousy of doctors'
> titles could have been a work in devising the scheme. In most other
> fields a PhD is done only by exceptional people who want an academic
> career, and involves considerable personal cost.
>
PhD - 3 years full time. In addition to a bunch of other qualifications.
I looked into it briefly a while back - too much like hard work :-)
--
Cheers, Rob
Roland Perry
Nov 30, 2014, 10:57:17 AM11/30/14
to
In message <MrKdnV8UFpp2QuTJ...@brightview.co.uk>, at
15:02:03 on Sat, 29 Nov 2014, Clive George <cl...@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk>
issue. The "not bothering" was something that many people, at the time,
regarded as evidence of a sloppy attitude to life.
--
Roland Perry
15:02:03 on Sat, 29 Nov 2014, Clive George <cl...@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk>
remarked:
>>>> I have a Masters degree, although I only studied up to Bachelors level.
>>>> It just came through the post a couple of years after I graduated. Very
>>>> nice it is, too, especially as I lost the certificate for my Bachelors.
>>>
>>> Me too - I've never put it on my letters etc. though, as I feel it
>>> could mislead the uninitiated!
>>
>> In my case I believe it would be misleading *not* to use the MA form of
>> the degree, because anyone claiming a BA Cantab would be expected to be
>> in their early 20's.
>
>There's a reasonable number of us who haven't bothered getting the MA.
>I don't think anybody would mistake me for somebody in their early 20s,
Nor me, these days. But there was a time when it could have been an
>>>> I have a Masters degree, although I only studied up to Bachelors level.
>>>> It just came through the post a couple of years after I graduated. Very
>>>> nice it is, too, especially as I lost the certificate for my Bachelors.
>>>
>>> Me too - I've never put it on my letters etc. though, as I feel it
>>> could mislead the uninitiated!
>>
>> In my case I believe it would be misleading *not* to use the MA form of
>> the degree, because anyone claiming a BA Cantab would be expected to be
>> in their early 20's.
>
>There's a reasonable number of us who haven't bothered getting the MA.
>I don't think anybody would mistake me for somebody in their early 20s,
issue. The "not bothering" was something that many people, at the time,
regarded as evidence of a sloppy attitude to life.
--
Roland Perry
Clive George
Nov 30, 2014, 4:22:51 PM11/30/14
to
Roland Perry
Dec 1, 2014, 4:21:45 AM12/1/14
to
In message <6ImdndGzy9ya6ubJ...@brightview.co.uk>, at
19:59:03 on Sun, 30 Nov 2014, Clive George <cl...@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk>
remarked:
are done". While there are clearly people who opt out of all of that,
back in the day when only 20% of the population did A-levels, 5% passed
three and 6% went to University, let alone a red brick one, it was a
different world.
--
Roland Perry
19:59:03 on Sun, 30 Nov 2014, Clive George <cl...@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk>
remarked:
>>> There's a reasonable number of us who haven't bothered getting the MA.
>>> I don't think anybody would mistake me for somebody in their early 20s,
>>
>> Nor me, these days. But there was a time when it could have been an
>> issue. The "not bothering" was something that many people, at the time,
>> regarded as evidence of a sloppy attitude to life.
>
>Maybe I'm sufficiently young - I've never seen such an attitude.
It's about being "in step with the establishment" and the way "things
>>> I don't think anybody would mistake me for somebody in their early 20s,
>>
>> Nor me, these days. But there was a time when it could have been an
>> issue. The "not bothering" was something that many people, at the time,
>> regarded as evidence of a sloppy attitude to life.
>
>Maybe I'm sufficiently young - I've never seen such an attitude.
are done". While there are clearly people who opt out of all of that,
back in the day when only 20% of the population did A-levels, 5% passed
three and 6% went to University, let alone a red brick one, it was a
different world.
--
Roland Perry
GB
Dec 1, 2014, 5:08:58 AM12/1/14
to
On 29/11/2014 11:01, polygonum wrote:
> I quote from the website of one such (though absolutely outwith the NHS):
>
> Dr A BC PhD, MSc, FRSPH, MIHPE
>
> Later on the person states "For absolute clarity – I am not a medical
> doctor." - but you do have to read that page and not simply rely on
> overall impression.
This seems to me to be entirely proper. The man has a Ph.D., and he is
> I quote from the website of one such (though absolutely outwith the NHS):
>
> Dr A BC PhD, MSc, FRSPH, MIHPE
>
> Later on the person states "For absolute clarity – I am not a medical
> doctor." - but you do have to read that page and not simply rely on
> overall impression.
perfectly entitled to style himself Dr.
Percy Picacity
Dec 1, 2014, 8:59:23 AM12/1/14
to
themselves 'Doctor' or 'Professor'. It is only when the intention is
to mislead, especially for profit, that the law would intervene.
--
Percy Picacity
Roland Perry
Dec 1, 2014, 10:54:36 AM12/1/14
to
In message <81edvc....@news.alt.net>, at 12:54:34 on Mon, 1 Dec
"Professor" (in a country not the UK) on account of being what we might
call a visiting lecturer at a University, once a year.
--
Roland Perry
2014, Percy Picacity <k...@under.the.invalid> remarked:
>Anyone can call
>themselves 'Doctor' or 'Professor'. It is only when the intention is
>to mislead, especially for profit, that the law would intervene.
I have a long standing colleague who quite properly styles himself as
>themselves 'Doctor' or 'Professor'. It is only when the intention is
>to mislead, especially for profit, that the law would intervene.
"Professor" (in a country not the UK) on account of being what we might
call a visiting lecturer at a University, once a year.
--
Roland Perry
polygonum
Dec 2, 2014, 2:56:11 AM12/2/14
to
I am trying not to identify the individual, but it is not only me that
considered the use of Dr. on the person's website required a degree of
prominence to its non-medical usage.
--
Rod
Chris R
Dec 2, 2014, 4:28:45 AM12/2/14
to
>
>
> "Percy Picacity" wrote in message news:81edvc....@news.alt.net...
Medical Act 1983: a person who "wilfully and falsely ... takes or uses the
name or title of ... doctor of medicine" commits an offence, without any
need for deception.
--
Chris R
========legalstuff========
I post to be helpful but not claiming any expertise nor intending
anyone to rely on what I say. Nothing I post here will create a
professional relationship or duty of care. I do not provide legal
services to the public. My posts here refer only to English law except
where specified and are subject to the terms (including limitations of
liability) at http://www.clarityincorporatelaw.co.uk/legalstuff.html
======end legalstuff======
Percy Picacity
Dec 2, 2014, 8:58:42 AM12/2/14
to
medical practitioner by using the title 'doctor' then actually having a
PhD may provide an alibi but does not alter the underlying subterfuge.
Even a very respectable academic background rather than a low quality
doctorate does not really change this fact.
And as I said earlier in the thread the desire of various para-medical
or nursing 'consultants' in the NHS to mislead patients is one thing
fuelling the demand for easy, low quality 'doctorates' that are of no
use for academic purposes.
--
Percy Picacity
Percy Picacity
Dec 2, 2014, 8:58:57 AM12/2/14
to
On 2014-12-02 08:16:55 +0000, Chris R said:
> >
>>
>> "Percy Picacity" wrote in message news:81edvc....@news.alt.net...
>>
>> On 2014-12-01 10:08:23 +0000, GB said:
>>
>>> On 29/11/2014 11:01, polygonum wrote:
>>>
>>>> I quote from the website of one such (though absolutely outwith the NHS):
>>>>
>>>> Dr A BC PhD, MSc, FRSPH, MIHPE
>>>>
>>>> Later on the person states "For absolute clarity – I am not a medical
>>>> doctor." - but you do have to read that page and not simply rely on
>>>> overall impression.
>>>
>>> This seems to me to be entirely proper. The man has a Ph.D., and he is
>>> perfectly entitled to style himself Dr.
>>
>> As indeed is anyone who does not have a PhD. Anyone can call
>> themselves 'Doctor' or 'Professor'. It is only when the intention is
>> to mislead, especially for profit, that the law would intervene.
>>
> Not if there is an implication that they are a medical doctor. Section
> 49 Medical Act 1983: a person who "wilfully and falsely ... takes or
> uses the name or title of ... doctor of medicine" commits an offence,
> without any need for deception.
There is however no appetite to nail such fraudsters nowadays. This is
> >
>>
>> "Percy Picacity" wrote in message news:81edvc....@news.alt.net...
>>
>> On 2014-12-01 10:08:23 +0000, GB said:
>>
>>> On 29/11/2014 11:01, polygonum wrote:
>>>
>>>> I quote from the website of one such (though absolutely outwith the NHS):
>>>>
>>>> Dr A BC PhD, MSc, FRSPH, MIHPE
>>>>
>>>> Later on the person states "For absolute clarity – I am not a medical
>>>> doctor." - but you do have to read that page and not simply rely on
>>>> overall impression.
>>>
>>> This seems to me to be entirely proper. The man has a Ph.D., and he is
>>> perfectly entitled to style himself Dr.
>>
>> As indeed is anyone who does not have a PhD. Anyone can call
>> themselves 'Doctor' or 'Professor'. It is only when the intention is
>> to mislead, especially for profit, that the law would intervene.
>>
> Not if there is an implication that they are a medical doctor. Section
> 49 Medical Act 1983: a person who "wilfully and falsely ... takes or
> uses the name or title of ... doctor of medicine" commits an offence,
> without any need for deception.
the main purpose for which the General Medical Council was set up,
though now, as a Government controlled body, it sees its role as to
terrorise doctors rather than going after quacks.
--
Percy Picacity
0 new messages