Sponsors
Top Posters this month
Geoff Hannis 178
Roger 32
Eddie 30
Huw 25
Paul Latham 21
Cyberdog 18
MikeX 16
RoJo 14
JohnBhoy 14
Kawasaki 11
Lee S 11
Cliff Juby 10
Press Releases
Rigel electrical safety analysers put to the test at Siemens
6 November 2008

Welch Allyn Helps to Improve Patient Care in Harrow PCT
21 October 2008

End of Summer 2008 Sale
21 October 2008

75% of all Acute Hospitals now use Hilditch Auctions
14 October 2008

NHS Orders
nhs purchase orders
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#20897 - 12/12/05 08:22 PM Professional Regulation
Anonymous
Unregistered


Do interested parties or representatives from the VRCT, DoH, NHS, HPC, etc, etc have any comments with regard to this concern posted a while back?

Mr R J Ling

------
Member # 301


posted 23 February, 2005 08:17 PM


 Quote:
I hope the VRCT has not just been a means of presenting the HPC with justification of a need to regulate the profession, with an ulterior motive of advancing Medical Physics, by using EBME and other engineering departments and interest from other sources to boost numbers then once regulation is on the way EBME the others are cast-off because regulation is "unworkable". We need more reassurance and input from VRCT, HPC and employers and consultation on this issue as Kevin Haylett has already commented on.
Somehow, after reading Dr Haylett's report on the meeting of 17th Oct 2005 RE: the process of registration of medical engineers under the framework of "Clinical Technologists", I think there may have been an element of truth in this statement.

Top
#20898 - 16/12/05 10:41 AM Re: Professional Regulation
Jim Methven Offline
Visionary

Registered: 27/12/01
Posts: 37
Loc: Regional Medical Physics Depar...
Richard

Yes, you have caught us out - the team running the VRCT has nothing better to do than spend all of its time plotting to undermine those working in EBME and other engineering departments in order to benefit those working in Medical Physics! What errant nonsense - I am surprised that you, of all people, would go along with such ludicrous, conspiracy claptrap!!!

This whole process is about raising the profile of those working in EBME and other engineering departments (and Medical Physics). Not about doing each other down.

I will not comment further on this subject as, once again, the professional integrity of the VRCT team is being questioned. I am not prepared to indulge further those looking to score cheap shots as a means of fuelling their inferiority complexes.

Jim Methven

Top
#20899 - 16/12/05 12:16 PM Re: Professional Regulation
Billy Offline
Technologist

Registered: 31/10/05
Posts: 43
Loc: Carlisle
Is this acronym R us (ARS).

Look at it like this it doesnt matter if you are Med Physics or EBME they are all out to get us or is this just cynical.

I have my own concerns over a pile of buerocrats sitting on a fat wage pushing paper and not knowing what the man on the ground actually does.
I am always sceptical of anything any government thinks is a good idea.

Poll tax, community charge, toll roads, safety cameras (money makers) and so on.

The Voluntary register yes but what happens when buerocacy takes over and it starts costing us to do the job that we have been doing for years. This is my concerns.

Billy

Top
#20900 - 16/12/05 01:44 PM Re: Professional Regulation
Anonymous
Unregistered


Jim,

You speak on behalf of the VRCT in your last posting? Although I find it a particularly abusive attack, apparently aimed personally at me (rather than a representative group, collective or organisation); however I will reiterate.

 Quote:
We need more reassurance and input from VRCT, HPC and employers and consultation on this issue as Kevin Haylett has already commented on.
Some reassurance in your last post then - is this the real "face" of the VRCT coming to the fore then? So the sum total of your comments RE: my concern(s). The comments obviously hit a "raw nerve".

Why doesn't the VRCT post something useful like explaining how the regulation process is (or isn't) progressing - I've seen nothing despite recent meetings reported by Dr Haylett, who has no affiliation with VRCT as far as I'm aware.

What we don't need is those on the VRCT panel taking criticism all so very much personally - and making personal attacks on individuals when they have concerns de-facto: communication between VRCT and EBME departments, in particular, is "crap". You've just reinforced this with your response.

 Quote:
I hope the VRCT has not just been a means of presenting the HPC with justification of a need to regulate the profession, with an ulterior motive of advancing Medical Physics, by using EBME and other engineering departments and interest from other sources to boost numbers then once regulation is on the way EBME the others are cast-off because regulation is "unworkable".
Actually if you read this statement of concern - it is the HPC that is criticised more than VRCT since it is the HPC that will regulate professionals not the VRCT as far as I'm aware. Medical Physics has a range of disciplines not covered by EBME thus EBME may be excluded, ultimately, if medical engineering is not encompassed within the regulation process - it's a valid concern as far as I'm concerned.

Top
#20901 - 16/12/05 02:06 PM Re: Professional Regulation
Paul Charles Offline
Novice

Registered: 11/08/05
Posts: 18
Loc: Bridgend Mid Glamorgan
It apperars to me from statements posed (rightly or wrongly) that VRCT and HPC have different agenda's. I was under the impresion that in a democratic society it is up to the members to ensure that it is steared in the direction so as to benefit ALL members, and that this should be the common goal. After all whatever the background we ALL have something to offer.
Come on lets not behave like children.
_________________________
Life is full of s**t its only the depth that matters

Top
#20902 - 16/12/05 02:13 PM Re: Professional Regulation
Anonymous
Unregistered


 Quote:
Do interested parties or representatives from the VRCT, DoH, NHS, HPC, etc, etc have any comments with regard to this concern posted a while back?
Should those with concerns, who are included in the VRCT, employees of the NHS, stakeholders in the NHS and could be regulated by the HPC, expect responses from:

 Quote:
VRCT, DoH, NHS, HPC
Yes, I think so. I could understand such a crapulous response from any one of these if I were to single-out an individual or specific organisation but not when I include all major parties involved to comment. I think it is Mr Methven who is showing his sensitivity and his insecurities on this issue, not I or others who have as genuine concerns about where the profession is going as he does, believe it or not.

Top
#20903 - 16/12/05 04:41 PM Re: Professional Regulation
Houdi Elbow Offline
Newbie

Registered: 23/11/05
Posts: 2
Loc: on a lonely platform
What an absolute mess!!
I've learned more about the VRCT today in this thread than in the last three years.
Still its helped me make up my mind, I'm off to see what the Engineering Council has to offer I think they already support/regulate MTO's.
_________________________
God is a comedian performing before an audience thats afraid to laugh!

Top
#20904 - 16/12/05 06:06 PM Re: Professional Regulation
Anonymous
Unregistered


Houdi,

When Jim posted:

 Quote:
I am not prepared to indulge further those looking to score cheap shots as a means of fuelling their inferiority complexes.
I think he was referring to me, personally, not to alienate the whole of the EBME fraternity - even though I am convinced there is a significant number working in medical engineering who may share similar concerns to mine.

Unfortunately Jim has taken my comments personally. Perhaps he is too close to the VRCT and needs to take a step back from it and listen to such comments. This aside I am certain that the VRCT panel have been working hard towards the goal of regulation and I hope they are successful - they deserve to be after putting in such effort.

However, as Paul Charles suggests I think the VRCT may have been used to push through other agendas that may not be of direct benefit to medical engineering technicians working in maintenance. Perhaps the recognised engineering registration/routes are considered more appropriate to the HPC/NHS employers/Industry.

Loud, showy, opinionated, interfering, brash, brisk, surly, offhand, etc, etc, I may be - but an inferiority complex? - I don't think so.

Top
#20905 - 18/12/05 02:33 PM Re: Professional Regulation
Louis Lyniswern III Offline
Sage

Registered: 30/07/02
Posts: 496
Loc: التي &...
Louis used to be paranoid once. My doctor never confirmed this but I knew that what he was thinking. :boggle:

LIII

Happy Christmas all
_________________________
No trees were harmed in the posting of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
كيف الآن يحمّر البقرة

Top
#20906 - 18/12/05 05:49 PM Re: Professional Regulation
Anonymous
Unregistered


Unfortunately it's impossible to make rational judgements without knowing what's going-on. When no information is forthcoming then I tend to get suspicious. If, by definition, paranoia is an irrational suspicion or distrustfulness then I guess you're correct Louis. I distrust any person or organisation that can't give a straight answer to a strightforward question or at least make conciliatory noises to that effect.

However I'm not discriminating - any organisation that takes my money, treats me like a mushroom when I'm willing to cooperate and "advance the cause" and then can't take criticism would make me paranoid - there are more "paranoid individuals" out there no doubt. Merry Christmas and best wishes for the new year to all.

Top
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >


Who's Online
19 Registered (Baldrick, bcarlisle, bill_mcg, biomedbill, christian malin, Ciaran McGuinness, Dicky, Geoff Hannis, Graham Barnes, Huw, JB, John Stewart, MikeX, Paul Latham, Peter, sdah, steven rogers, Tendai, TonyR), and 116 guests online.
Newest Members
Geezer, Matutez, firestorm809, abdul, drew smith
4057 Registered Users
Jobs
Medical Technical Officer
-- 14 November 2008

Senior Medical Engineer Band 5 / 6
-- 13 November 2008

Medical Equipment Manager
-- 13 November 2008

Snr Asst. Practitioner - Clinical technology
-- 13 November 2008

Biomedical Electronics Team Manager
-- 10 November 2008

Senior Clinical Engineer
-- 3 November 2008

Medical Electronics Maintenance Technologist
-- 17 October 2008

Anaesthetic Maintenance Technologist
-- 17 October 2008

Qados – Sales Specialist
-- 16 October 2008

Addenbrookes Vacancies x 4
-- 16 October 2008

Field Service Engineers for Medical Equipment
-- 9 October 2008

Newsletter

Subscribe
Unsubscribe