EBME Forums Forums Management Professional Issues Registration VRCT Facts and fiction.

In my view information from VRCT has been scant to say the least. At least Kevin has expressed his views openly and has had the conviction to present them formally within the IET.

I agree with some of his views but feel that IEE was not particularly interested in the subject of medical engineering in the past to get involved in the registration debate, so why should their members who're already registered in other professions and not included in the VRCT be given a platform now?

Now the IEE has merged with IIE it's taken-on some of the the interests of the IIE and even IPEM, it seems, which means, unfortunately in some respects, that ex IEE "expert members in medical engineering" who should have nothing to do with VRCT now seem to have a say in what was actually nothing to do with membership of a professional institution, as such, when it was started - this was the case wasn't it?

IPEM administered VRCT, IIE and ART were affiliated - technicians in post on the VRCT decided the direction they wanted VRCT to go in, i.e. whether they agreed in principle to regulation, they joined, otherwise not, and this didn't have anything to do with membership of any particular professional institution - VRCT members still do not have to be members of any institution do they?

Why should anyone who is not included on the VRCT or be working in other non-technician job roles be allowed to push their noses in and decide the future of those that are technicians , irrespective of institution. If they are being allowed then there must be some reason for this and it implies to me that "medical experts" in other job roles will have a say what we do in our job role as registered professionals. No change there then.

I don't try interfere with the regulation of Clinical Scientists working in medical engineering even though on paper I'm an "expert" in Medical Engineering and a "technician". Perhaps I should but they've got the role so stitched up via regulation...........

I thought VRCT was seperate from membership of instutions, for now, and as such negative input from IET, IEE, IIE, ART members is not particularly relevant unless they're on the VRCT? Thus members of any instution who are neither technician nor included in the VRCT shouldn't have the right to interfere really.

Now ex IEE members, of which I'm one as well as being a member of IPEM and included in the VRCT (so I feel I have the right to comment from either perspective), who are already registered in other professions are lining up to have their say in what essentially should involve technicians on the VRCT not professional scientists or engineers who may already be registered as Engineers and Clinical Scientists and on other registers, i.e. those in different job-roles to those on the VRCT.

Who gave ex IEE members who are not included on the VRCT the right to interfere with the VRCT if the VRCT has never had anything to do with IEE and it's administered through IPEM isn't it?

I say we must resist interference and exclude non VRCT individuals, whatever their post nominals are, who are already registered with HPC in other job roles, from unduly influencing the discussion and we mustn't allow the VRCT to become kicked from pillar to post by different institutions in-fighting over who gets to influence the direction VRCT heads in.

VRCT should hold discussions with employers, DoH and HPC not other professions those that set themselves up to be our "superiors" and "know what's best for technicians", in my opinion.

I don't try to influence what happens with paramedics or ODPs registration so why should Clinical Scientists, i.e. the "medical engineering experts" that the IET wants to have input into the process on behalf of technicians, be allowed to?

Let technicians included in the VRCT decide what they want to do - not VRCT registrars, etc, and other professionals. Clinical Scientists had the choice whether to register without interference from other professional groups I believe. All i ask is for the same courtesy.

I wonder how many of those that oppose the VRCT and regulation via HPC in such meetings as this are actually working as Technicians?